OT: Get involved Geeks! Your civil rights are being threatened!
Jamie Kahn Genet
so incensed I feel I've no other choice. Too often Geeks fail to make
their voices heard and that really has to stop, or we're going to wake
up one day and realise our freedoms have just slipped away from us while
we were playing WoW and otherwise geeking out]
<http://www.eff.org/issues/acta>
In brief: the RIAA, MPAA and other lobby groups failed to have their way
with the usual law making apparatus, so now they're trying to go behind
your backs and slip their provisions into law via treaty with no public
consultation.
Namely:
If you're merely _accused_ (no proof needed) by a copyright holder of
being a violator three times you can be banned from using the internet
without investigation, trial or any official government involvement.
Your details will also be circulated among all other ISPs preventing
them from accepting your business.
They want increased penalties for copyright violation totally out of
line with penalties for other non-violent crime.
They want increased search and seizure powers, and not just at borders.
It goes on, so I encourage you to read the above webpage and other
material linked from there. Decide for yourself whether this, IMHO,
undemocratic, unethical, immoral invasion of your civil liberties and
rights is acceptable to you. Is this the kind of world you want to live
in?
If you're in the US write your congressman and senator to demand that
this treaty not be ratified with the above provisions. Also contact the
groups lobbying for the change and ask them why they consider attacking
copyright violators is more important that civil rights and the very
spirit of democracy. Public shame hasn't worked well so far on these
groups, but I'll bet an economic boycott would! Though how much do you
want to bet they'll try and say falling profits indicate piracy rather
than any backlash from a public disgusted by their actions?
If you live outside the US contact your government representatives and
tell them loss of your rights and liberties are not worth the benefits
from signing this trade treaty. Tell them to demand a treaty without
these undemocratic and totally unethical and utterly immoral provisions.
However - regardless of your depth of feeling or even your stance on
this issue, for goodness sake MAKE YOUR VOICE HEARD! Don't just sit back
and let big business writing your laws. Vote out and publically shame
those who support actions you know to be wrong.
I'm sorry if it's an uncomfortable truth for you, but ultimately you the
voter are responsible for this. You need to make your voice heard and
vote these jokers out. Or even stand for government yourself! Goodness
knows we need more technically literate people in government. Geeks
cannot continue to stand on the sidelines and hope things just work out.
Please make your voice heard and get involved!
Regards,
Jamie Kahn Genet
--
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
Insane Ranter
wrote:
Almost time for the New World order?
C J Campbell
Genet) said:
>
> <http://www.eff.org/issues/acta>
>
> In brief: the RIAA, MPAA and other lobby groups failed to have their way
> with the usual law making apparatus, so now they're trying to go behind
> your backs and slip their provisions into law via treaty with no public
> consultation.
Hysterical nonsense. Now, as one who has had his copyrighted material
stolen repeatedly, I have to say that I have little sympathy for
thieves. But this article is more than a year old. The treaty was
supposed to be completed by "the end of 2008." Well, that has come and
gone.
Perhaps if you could come up with something more current than a panic
piece written nearly two years ago, we might have something to talk
about.
--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor
Jamie Kahn Genet
Perhaps these posts are recent enough for you? Or did you think you
could really try and paint this as old news? What is your game? Do you
actually want businesses to be able to accuse and have people banned
from accessing the internet without due process, to mention just one of
the highly disturbing proposals? Are you happy with the effort to slip
this into law via treaty without public consultation? Do civil rights
and the democratic process mean so _little_ to you? Do you have _any_
shame?
November 3rd, 2009:
<http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091103/1308526784.shtml>
November 3rd, 2009:
<http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/11/leaked-acta-internet-provisions-th
ree-strikes-and->
November 4th, 2009: <http://creativefreedom.org.nz/story.html?id=429>
Sorry if I thought you had the wit to follow links and google to find
out about ACTA and the _recent_ leaked info that has myself and a great
many others worried.
Frankly you disgust me. Do me a favour and killfile me forever. I don't
wish to ever interact with you again.
C J Campbell
Genet) said:
Don't be silly, Jamie. We get along just fine when talking about World
of Warcraft.
Thomas Hejl Pilgaard
1j9bqc7.18rm50sp1jradN%jam...@wizardling.geek.nz :
Now now Jamie, calm down.
Noone likes a fanatic.
Your first post was fine, but there was no reason to go apeshit like
that, just because someone made a mistake (forgive and forget) and
presents a differing opinion.
It's a discussion forum... That kind of reaction is rather silly.
I think Christopher had a valid point. As did you.
--
Permanently behind me: SWG & Age Of Conan.
Currently playing: WoW, LOTRO, WAR & Aion.
Waiting for: Dawntide, STOnline & Mytheon.
steve.kaye
wrote:
> Frankly you disgust me. Do me a favour and killfile me forever. I don't
> wish to ever interact with you again.
Well, that just prompted me to install Thunderbird at work so that I
can killfile you there as well.
steve.kaye
Jamie Kahn Genet
> He has indeed become an arsehole of near galactic proportions there,
> hasn't he.
>
>
> Palindrome
Well I already have Steve killfiled for being a hypocritical jerk when
it comes to anyone daring to mention Macs here, so he should feel free
to return the compliment :-)
Anyone needing any help killfiling me should feel free to ask, I'm happy
to help :-) Seriously. I enjoy helping people with their software.
Jamie Kahn Genet
Yeah well I've had to deal with quite a few arseholes since I decided to
take a stand on this. Guess it all bubbled over above. Knowing that
telling someone off is likely the worst way to try and change their mind
did occur to me. However it seemed pretty closed off to me and he was
the arsehole that broke the camel's back.
> Your first post was fine, but there was no reason to go apeshit like
> that, just because someone made a mistake (forgive and forget) and
> presents a differing opinion.
> It's a discussion forum... That kind of reaction is rather silly.
What can I say - people like that are why we have to work hard to hold
on to our freedoms.
> I think Christopher had a valid point. As did you.
Valid? Sure, he's welcome to try and be dismissive of a threat our civil
rights. I'm free - for now - to make it clear how revolting I find that.
C J Campbell
Genet) said:
The problem, Jamie, is that I have become rather jaded with the latest
Cause of the Day. The Internet is full of warnings of impending doom.
Have you checked out the Copenhagen Treaty?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rHM5PLq9KXo
I would call that a greater threat to our civil rights and our freedoms
than a mere treaty to enforce copyright laws. And yet, the video is
full of errors, not least the stupid idea that treaties somehow
supersede the Constitution of the United States. While that is a
popular idea among some internationalists, the truth is that the
Constitution is the supreme law of the land. Treaties are judged by
whether they are Constitutional; the Constitution is not judged by
whether it complies with treaties. I mean, take a look at the people on
the Supreme Court bench. Can you imagine, even in your wildest
nightmares, that even one of those personalities, let alone a majority
of them, is going to cede their authority as being the final say on the
law of the land to some other body? I think not. As Jefferson pointed
out, if the Constitution could be gotten around by treaties, then it
would not be a Constitution. Does that mean that that the threats to
our freedom posed by the Copenhagen treaty should be ignored? Probably
not. But is Obama really going to sign this thing and will it then be
ratified by the Senate? Not in our lifetime. It is just a "show" treaty
-- Obama gets to show the world that he is "working" to stop global
warming, even as he ensures that it contains provisions that will allow
him to reject it and do -- nothing. And he gets to blame
"conservatives" for tying his hands, too. What could be better?
The fact is, Jamie, that you can be thrown off the Internet without due
process right now, without any treaty allowing ISPs to do that. Check
your ISP agreement. ISPs are businesses who are more interested in
looking out for their interests rather than what you imagine to be your
rights. In fact, I personally have complained to ISPs in the past that
people were selling my photographs without my permission. Their sites
were closed immediately.
It is the same as if you walked into a shopping mall and started taking
whatever you like without paying for it. You can be sure that not only
would mall security escort you off the property, but you would be
arrested and the mall may well tell you to never return even if you
were never convicted -- no "due process" at all.
So it is with ISPs. They are businesses, and they will decide who they
do business with. They have civil rights, too, including the right
(even the responsibility) to refuse service to people that they see as
a threat to themselves or others. So I fail to see what "civil right"
you think is in danger. Certainly, no civil right that exists at this
time. And all the childish tantrums in the world will not change that,
except possibly to make it harder for people to be convinced that you
have a valid point of view and are not just another conspiracy-minded
nutcase screaming for attention.
Jamie Kahn Genet
I hope for our sakes it's also just a 'show' when it comes to ACTA. Me -
I'm taking it seriously. Plus I think you'll find if you read the actual
leaded documents regarding ACTA there's very little being reported by
reputable sites like the EFF that's wrong.
> The fact is, Jamie, that you can be thrown off the Internet without due
> process right now, without any treaty allowing ISPs to do that. Check
> your ISP agreement. ISPs are businesses who are more interested in
> looking out for their interests rather than what you imagine to be your
> rights. In fact, I personally have complained to ISPs in the past that
> people were selling my photographs without my permission. Their sites
> were closed immediately.
But all other ISP won't currently be connected and barred from providing
you service. That's the point, to mention only one of the many awful
provisions being proposed.
> It is the same as if you walked into a shopping mall and started taking
> whatever you like without paying for it. You can be sure that not only
> would mall security escort you off the property, but you would be
> arrested and the mall may well tell you to never return even if you
> were never convicted -- no "due process" at all.
>
> So it is with ISPs. They are businesses, and they will decide who they
> do business with. They have civil rights, too, including the right
> (even the responsibility) to refuse service to people that they see as
> a threat to themselves or others. So I fail to see what "civil right"
> you think is in danger. Certainly, no civil right that exists at this
> time. And all the childish tantrums in the world will not change that,
> except possibly to make it harder for people to be convinced that you
> have a valid point of view and are not just another conspiracy-minded
> nutcase screaming for attention.
You can try and say that, but then you run into a little roadblock -
opps! Oh what a shame! It turns out I'm not the only one. And I'm in
very reputable company :-)
<http://www.nzherald.co.nz/technology/news/article.cfm?c_id=5&objectid=1
0607376>
<http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/g/a/2009/11/11/apop111109.
DTL&tsp=1>
<http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/editorial/regulating-the-net-in-the-dark-
20091110-i7ic.html>
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/13/AR20091
11300852.html?wprss=rss_technology>
<http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/finance/2009/1113/1224258721485.htm
l>
The simple fact is you're either full of shit or just have your head so
deep in the sand you're clueless as to what's going on around you. Or I
suppose you might actually support this shit... no, you can't be that
stupid. You've shown in the past you're clearly a reasonably intelligent
person.
So do you want to tell me what your real issue here is? Because I've
just proven you're _incrediably_ full of shit when it comes to trying to
paint me as some lone nut.
Lurker
"Jamie Kahn Genet" <jam...@wizardling.geek.nz> wrote in message
news:1j9d5my.1h3sjwu1a9dkN%jam...@wizardling.geek.nz...
-plonk-
Lurker
You do know that it is not obligatory that you reply to every thread in a
newsgroup. It is sad that you had to reduce the thread to name calling....
tsk tsk. Looks like you did a pretty good job on your own of painting
yourself as some lone nut.
Please realize that "part of the solution" is to stop breaking your Prozac
in half.