The U.S. already signed it? Does that mean I will start seeing its effects soon?
Also, would I be able to sign this despite not being a European citizen?
What I'm wondering is: Why does it seem so hard to come up with a framework that efficiently fights real piracy, such as counterfeit jeans, iPhones or DVDs made in China and brought to and sold in western countries by illicit means, without also compromising the most basic human rights of freedom of speech? (Also another thing that puzzles me is that governments giving themselves rights to limit freedom of speech is one thing, but why do these proposals seem to always want to give private corporations those same rights?)
Joined: 3/2/2010
Posts: 2174
Location: A little to the left of nowhere (Sweden)
Warp wrote:
What I'm wondering is: Why does it seem so hard to come up with a framework that efficiently fights real piracy, such as counterfeit jeans, iPhones or DVDs made in China and brought to and sold in western countries by illicit means, without also compromising the most basic human rights of freedom of speech? (Also another thing that puzzles me is that governments giving themselves rights to limit freedom of speech is one thing, but why do these proposals seem to always want to give private corporations those same rights?)
This is because governments aren't really intended to support any of declared RIGHTS. Only the charges. The mask is falling.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Governments are what we make them to be. Low taxes, low levels of interest in politics of the general public, low motivation for the public to speak up on important issues, media manipulation forming public opinion, deregulation or the "free market religion", having blind faith in your leaders, each of them lead governments to not really represent public interest all too well anymore.
Representing public interest is the one important thing that governments are supposed to do though, that's why we absolutely need to have them. Who else would represent public interest? Who would prevent companies from making huge profits at the cost of the general public if not a government supporting their interests?
Governments aren't bad, big governments aren't bad, only dysfunctional ones are. A government is dysfunctional if the general public doesn't really care too much and just lets things happen. The idea of fixing bad government by getting rid of it is totally insane, that's like trying to cure a weak heart by ripping it out from between your ribs. The required changes to get government on the right track again are highly unlikely to happen from above, that's a bit like waiting for a miracle, they have to happen at the grassroots level.
The U.S. already signed it? Does that mean I will start seeing its effects soon?
Signing the treaty isn't enough for it to take effect; the Senate also has to ratify it. I'm hopeful that the extremely negative reception of the bill in other countries will prevent that from happening here.
Pyrel - an open-source rewrite of the Angband roguelike game in Python.
Also another thing that puzzles me is that governments giving themselves rights to limit freedom of speech is one thing, but why do these proposals seem to always want to give private corporations those same rights?
That is the puzzling bit? You must be a saint.
These bills are heavily lobbied by said corporations. It's them who infuse money to have them passed, because they want to secure their positions as the money siphons, and they want these rights for exactly the same reasons everybody else does. It's the neverending circle of money leading to power leading to more money and more power, and some (many) politicians just happen to relate to that.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
The U.S. already signed it? Does that mean I will start seeing its effects soon?
Signing the treaty isn't enough for it to take effect; the Senate also has to ratify it. I'm hopeful that the extremely negative reception of the bill in other countries will prevent that from happening here.
That's good. Apparently the U.S. signed it already in secret in October 2011, meaning the American people had no say in it. I just hope a big negative response will come from the citizens of America against the bill like what happened with SOPA and PIPA.
The U.S. already signed it? Does that mean I will start seeing its effects soon?
Signing the treaty isn't enough for it to take effect; the Senate also has to ratify it. I'm hopeful that the extremely negative reception of the bill in other countries will prevent that from happening here.
That's good. Apparently the U.S. signed it already in secret in October 2011, meaning the American people had no say in it. I just hope a big negative response will come from the citizens of America against the bill like what happened with SOPA and PIPA.
More likely, I expect it will just be quietly forgotten and the entertainment industry will try to get the same laws passed as riders on other, more important things. The only penalty for failure here is that you have to wait a bit before you try again; eventually they'll succeed (unless they get pushed out of business first or we somehow manage to overhaul the legislative process).
Pyrel - an open-source rewrite of the Angband roguelike game in Python.
