Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Leaked documents reveal draft text of top-secret global copyright deal
montrealgazette.com ^ | April 7, 2010Comments | Vito Pilieci

Posted on 04/08/2010 12:34:11 PM PDT by day21221

Leaked documents reveal draft text of secret global copyright deal

)

OTTAWA — As negotiators from 37 countries prepare to meet in New Zealand on Monday to discuss a top-secret trade agreement, a draft text of the document has found its way onto the Internet.

While bits and pieces of the agreement, called the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA), have been leaked in the past, this is the first time a full draft is available to the public.

The agreement, negotiated privately for the better part of two years, aims to create a global organization to oversee worldwide copyright and intellectual property issues, which are now the responsibility of the World Trade Organization, the World Intellectual Property Organization and the United Nations.

The release of the draft text comes at a time when the Canadian government is holding cross-country consultations to collect public input for new Canadian copyright laws. Agreeing to the treaty would require Canada to meet certain legal requirements. Many of the legal requirements mimic laws already in place in the United States.

"To Canada this would require quite a change from domestic laws," said Gwen Hinze, international director of the Electronic Frontier Foundation. "That's a good question to be asking of the Canadian negotiators: 'Is this going to leave a lasting legacy that effectively moots any domestic consultation process on copyright issues?'"

The draft text of the treaty includes enhanced search powers for border-crossing guards, allowing them to comb through the personal computers and iPods of travellers.

It also prohibits the use of products which could be used to circumvent the digital locks on media, such as DVDs. The practice is not illegal in Canada and is used by many to create backup copies of movies.

The agreement will also place more responsibility on Internet service providers, such as Rogers and Bell, to become content police and prevent users from sharing pirated content over the Internet.

Punishment for repeat offenders includes a ban from the using the Internet for up to 12 months.

A spokeswoman for Industry Canada, which is responsible for Canadian copyright laws, said the federal government is moving ahead with new copyright legislation and the trade agreement would have no impact on the bill. However, she would not comment on changes that would have to be made to legislation if Canada adopts the trade agreement.

Peter Van Loan, minister of international trade, said Wednesday in an e-mail that the Canadian government would not sign on to the agreement unless it "reflects the best interest of Canadians."

"Negotiations are continuing and there is not yet an agreement," he noted.

The agreement is being structured much like the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), except it would create rules and regulations regarding private copying and copyright laws. Although federal trade agreements do not require parliamentary approval, large trade agreements such as NAFTA have been brought before Parliament for debate.

The agreement is being pushed forward by the Office of the United States Trade Representative.

In early March, U.S. President Barack Obama spoke in favour of the agreement, saying it was necessary to protect American businesses and technologies.

David Fewer, director of the Canadian Internet Policy and Public Interest Clinic at the University of Ottawa, has been following the development of the treaty closely and believes it provides little benefit to anyone but large U.S. content producers such as record labels, software makers and technology companies.

"Early on I described ACTA as a Christmas wish list for rights holders and I'll be damned if that doesn't look like what it is," he said. "It's obviously not made in Canada. This doesn't reflect any kind of domestic agenda."

The leaked text of the trade agreement came from officials in France, who are unhappy with the cloak and dagger techniques being employed to keep the contents of the trade agreement secret.

Earlier this month, parliamentarians in the European Union voted to open the negotiations to the public and allow consultations on its contents. The vote passed with 633 EU parliamentarians voting in favour of opening access, only 13 voted against it.

Read more: http://www.montrealgazette.com/business/Leaked+documents+reveal+draft+text+secret+global+copyright+deal/2774774/story.html#ixzz0kXMLcK71


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Front Page News; Government
KEYWORDS: acta; bigmedia; bush; copyright; copyrightlaw; dcma; deal; endoffreedom; fairuse; global; globalelite; intellectualproperty; ipod; mp3; mp3s; musicindustry; nafta; nwo; secret; un; unitednations; usoutofun; wtfisbushakeyword; wto
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-60 next last
In early March, U.S. President Barack Obama spoke in favour of the agreement, saying it was necessary to protect American businesses and technologies.
1 posted on 04/08/2010 12:34:12 PM PDT by day21221
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: day21221
The draft text of the treaty includes enhanced search powers for border-crossing guards, allowing them to comb through the personal computers and iPods of travellers.

Something I've heard Airport Customs already can do (and it includes searching for illegal mp3 downloads).

2 posted on 04/08/2010 12:38:36 PM PDT by a fool in paradise (VP Biden on Obamacare's passage: "This is a big f-ing deal". grumpygresh: "Repeal the f-ing deal")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: day21221

Anything tied to the WTO and the UN is never good....the Liberal Globalists may feel otherwise.....but I do not want the WTO or UN involved in anything in the USA


3 posted on 04/08/2010 12:39:14 PM PDT by UCFRoadWarrior (JD Hayworth for Senate jdforsenate.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: day21221

Republicans should come out strong against this... but I doubt they will... corporate america will want it...


4 posted on 04/08/2010 12:39:25 PM PDT by bahblahbah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: day21221
Punishment for repeat offenders includes a ban from the using the Internet for up to 12 months.

Internet license, coming to your future soon, comrade.

5 posted on 04/08/2010 12:39:42 PM PDT by a fool in paradise (VP Biden on Obamacare's passage: "This is a big f-ing deal". grumpygresh: "Repeal the f-ing deal")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: day21221
David Fewer, director of the Canadian Internet Policy and Public Interest Clinic at the University of Ottawa, has been following the development of the treaty closely and believes it provides little benefit to anyone but large U.S. content producers such as record labels, software makers and technology companies.

Because nothing is going to force the corrupt Ahmet Engums of the world who ran the Atlantic Records of this world to actually PAY the Ruth Browns and Sam & Daves of this world. It's business. Collect money off other peoples' efforts and get rich. Settle after decades of lawsuits later.

6 posted on 04/08/2010 12:42:00 PM PDT by a fool in paradise (VP Biden on Obamacare's passage: "This is a big f-ing deal". grumpygresh: "Repeal the f-ing deal")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bahblahbah

Big Media is a powerful lobbying group.


7 posted on 04/08/2010 12:42:21 PM PDT by a fool in paradise (VP Biden on Obamacare's passage: "This is a big f-ing deal". grumpygresh: "Repeal the f-ing deal")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: a fool in paradise

How can they tell if an MP3 was illegally downloaded or not?


8 posted on 04/08/2010 12:42:27 PM PDT by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: day21221

Would the Bible fall under a copyright protected document? Any way the government could regulate that?


9 posted on 04/08/2010 12:43:01 PM PDT by camerongood210
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: day21221

Maybe everything should become public domain after some reasonable length of time. I would hate to export our IP mess into a global mess.


10 posted on 04/08/2010 12:44:06 PM PDT by DonaldC (A nation cannot stand in the absence of religious principle.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: day21221
The draft text of the treaty includes enhanced search powers for border-crossing guards, allowing them to comb through the personal computers and iPods of travellers.

And of course the government would NEVER impart any viruses, spyware, or upload your private information...

11 posted on 04/08/2010 12:44:13 PM PDT by Carry_Okie (The RINOcrat Party is still in charge. There has never been a conservative American government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator

There are embedded names in some of the files.

And itune purchases would look different than ripped CD files.

Ultimately the authorities will charge first and let you fight it later.

Recall you are in an international travel and the “innocent until proven guilty” world of America is not universal.


12 posted on 04/08/2010 12:44:43 PM PDT by a fool in paradise (VP Biden on Obamacare's passage: "This is a big f-ing deal". grumpygresh: "Repeal the f-ing deal")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: camerongood210

“Would the Bible fall under a copyright protected document? Any way the government could regulate that?”

Actually, yes it is and yes they could.


13 posted on 04/08/2010 12:44:49 PM PDT by DonaldC (A nation cannot stand in the absence of religious principle.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: day21221

Intellectual property law is already about as corrupt constitutionally as the “health care reform” bill: the enumerated power under which Congress can pass patent and copyright laws reads

“To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.”

It says nothing about securing exclusive rights to commercial interests who neither wrote nor invented anything, nor to literary or scientific estates. The perpetual extensions of copyright terms make a mockery of “for limited Times”. And, objectively, the main effects of current patent and copyright law is to impede progress in science and the useful arts by making derivative works nearly impossible within the law, despite the supposed recognition of fair use.


14 posted on 04/08/2010 12:45:14 PM PDT by The_Reader_David (And when they behead your own people in the wars which are to come, then you will know. . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: camerongood210

Could Saudi customs search your computer for an encrypted or zipped Bible text?


15 posted on 04/08/2010 12:45:49 PM PDT by a fool in paradise (VP Biden on Obamacare's passage: "This is a big f-ing deal". grumpygresh: "Repeal the f-ing deal")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: DonaldC
Actually, yes it is and yes they could.

That's what I was afraid of. I think we all have a pretty good idea where all things go from this point forward.

16 posted on 04/08/2010 12:46:24 PM PDT by camerongood210
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator

It’s just an excuse for a fishing expedition.


17 posted on 04/08/2010 12:46:34 PM PDT by coydog (Time to feed the pigs!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator
How “Dirty” MP3 Files Are A Back Door Into Cloud DRM (tech cruncy ^ | 04.06.10 | Michael Arrington)

"All the big music sellers may have moved to non-DRM MP3 files long ago, but the watermarking of files with your personal information continues. Most users who buy music don’t know about the marking of files, or don’t care. Unless those files are uploaded to BitTorrent or other P2P networks, there isn’t much to worry about. A list of which music services are selling clean MP3 files without embedded personal information, and which aren’t, is here. Apple, LaLa (owned by Apple) and Walmart embed personal information. Amazon, Napster and the rest have resisted label pressure to do so. ..."

18 posted on 04/08/2010 12:47:34 PM PDT by a fool in paradise (VP Biden on Obamacare's passage: "This is a big f-ing deal". grumpygresh: "Repeal the f-ing deal")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: day21221
the Canadian government would not sign on to the agreement unless it "reflects the best interest of Canadians."

Would that our own gov't felt this way.

19 posted on 04/08/2010 12:48:42 PM PDT by mollynme (cogito, ergo freepum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: a fool in paradise
Could Saudi customs search your computer for an encrypted or zipped Bible text?

I would imagine they could, but that's not my ultimate concern. My thought is that some sort of copyright protection deal including the Bible would eventually lead to the government strictly controlling who has access to the text and who doesn't. I know it sounds crazy, but it also sounded crazy 2 years ago that we would have a government in place that doesn't give a crap about what we think, take over the HC system, etc. Things aren't lookin' good for us fellas.

20 posted on 04/08/2010 12:49:03 PM PDT by camerongood210
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: camerongood210

It’s possible.

100 years ago, many companies used the Mona Lisa in their trademarks and packaging.

Now the image of the Mona Lisa carries a copyright.

DaVinci’s heirs don’t see any money for it.


21 posted on 04/08/2010 12:50:19 PM PDT by a fool in paradise (VP Biden on Obamacare's passage: "This is a big f-ing deal". grumpygresh: "Repeal the f-ing deal")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: camerongood210

“Would the Bible fall under a copyright protected document? Any way the government could regulate that?”

Interesting question. Psalm 12, Verses 6&7: “The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
12:7 Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.”

Get it? They will regulate God’s Word when He is ready for them to regulate it.

The Authorized King James version is not copyrighted; it is in the public domain.


22 posted on 04/08/2010 12:51:40 PM PDT by RoadTest (Religion is a substitute for the relationship God wants with you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: day21221
Executive Fiat instead of laws - check.
Bills unread before passed - check.
Laws ignored because they are unreasonable - check.
Treaties drafted in secret - check.

The hits just keep coming...

23 posted on 04/08/2010 12:51:45 PM PDT by Drill Thrawl (Another day, another injury, another step closer. Are you prepared?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: day21221
Etc.

Secret copyright treaty leaks. It's bad. Very bad.

By Cory Doctorow at 2:13 PM November 3, 2009

The internet chapter of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, a secret copyright treaty whose text Obama's administration refused to disclose due to "national security" concerns, has leaked. It's bad. It says:

  • * That ISPs have to proactively police copyright on user-contributed material. This means that it will be impossible to run a service like Flickr or YouTube or Blogger, since hiring enough lawyers to ensure that the mountain of material uploaded every second isn't infringing will exceed any hope of profitability.

  • * That ISPs have to cut off the Internet access of accused copyright infringers or face liability. This means that your entire family could be denied to the internet -- and hence to civic participation, health information, education, communications, and their means of earning a living -- if one member is accused of copyright infringement, without access to a trial or counsel.

  • * That the whole world must adopt US-style "notice-and-takedown" rules that require ISPs to remove any material that is accused -- again, without evidence or trial -- of infringing copyright. This has proved a disaster in the US and other countries, where it provides an easy means of censoring material, just by accusing it of infringing copyright.

  • * Mandatory prohibitions on breaking DRM, even if doing so for a lawful purpose (e.g., to make a work available to disabled people; for archival preservation; because you own the copyrighted work that is locked up with DRM)
The ACTA Internet Chapter: Putting the Pieces Together

Next: More on secret copyright treaty: your kids could go to jail for noncommercial music sharing


24 posted on 04/08/2010 12:51:58 PM PDT by Palter (Kilroy was here.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RoadTest

“The Authorized King James version is not copyrighted; it is in the public domain.”

No, the British crown holds it and enforces it in England as I understand it. The U.S. has always ignored it but who knows, maybe that would change with this agreement.


25 posted on 04/08/2010 12:53:17 PM PDT by DonaldC (A nation cannot stand in the absence of religious principle.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: day21221

I believe the document has been on the internet since January.

Download the consolidated text of ACTA: http://www.laquadrature.net/files/201001_acta.pdf

ACTA is a multi-lateral agreement aimed at setting a standard for enforcing counterfeiting at the global level. The following document may not reflect the current state of the negotiations but it provides the public with an interesting overview of the whole agreement, background on the positions of the different parties, as well as more details regarding:

* The general scope of ACTA;
* Border measures;
* Criminal enforcement;
* International cooperation;
* Enforcement practices;
* The ACTA oversight committee (institutional arrangements chapter).

http://www.laquadrature.net/en/0118-version-of-acta-consolidated-text-leaks


26 posted on 04/08/2010 12:54:56 PM PDT by luckybogey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: N3WBI3; PAR35; Sir_Ed; SubGeniusX; TruthSetsUFree; rabscuttle385; ShadowAce; Baynative; holden; ...
The Copyfraud ping: copyright, patent and trademark law, mainly as applied to the digital age, especially their abuse.
If you want on or off the Copyfraud Ping List, Freepmail me.
27 posted on 04/08/2010 12:58:31 PM PDT by antiRepublicrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: luckybogey

How much of FR’s visual and literary content would be rule “in violation” of nations’ dismisal of any concept such as “fair use”?


28 posted on 04/08/2010 12:59:46 PM PDT by a fool in paradise (VP Biden on Obamacare's passage: "This is a big f-ing deal". grumpygresh: "Repeal the f-ing deal")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: The_Reader_David
It says nothing about securing exclusive rights to commercial interests who neither wrote nor invented anything . . . .

I have written several books. I signed over my copyright to a "commercial interest" (i.e., a publisher) in exchange for a royalty on the sales of my books. Although the publisher did not write the books, it took care of such things as printing and marketing them.

Do you see anything wrong with such an agreement?

29 posted on 04/08/2010 1:01:07 PM PDT by Logophile
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: DonaldC

““The Authorized King James version is not copyrighted; it is in the public domain.”

No, the British crown holds it and enforces it in England as I understand it. The U.S. has always ignored it but who knows, maybe that would change with this agreement.”

Yeah. My Thomas Nelson Bible (printed in Belgium) is sure enough copyrighted. But if you go here http://ebible.org/kjv/kjv.htm (University Of Virginia) you’ll see it’s public domain. Not sure what Nelson is copyrighting.


30 posted on 04/08/2010 1:02:08 PM PDT by RoadTest (Religion is a substitute for the relationship God wants with you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: bahblahbah
Republicans should come out strong against this... but I doubt they will...

Anyone besides me think it strange, that the top spokespeople for our party are women?

31 posted on 04/08/2010 1:08:36 PM PDT by itsahoot (Each generation takes to excess, what the previous generation accepted in moderation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: DonaldC
Maybe everything should become public domain after some reasonable length of time.

It's supposed to, but they keep extending it, forever on the installment plan.

32 posted on 04/08/2010 1:10:58 PM PDT by antiRepublicrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: The_Reader_David
The perpetual extensions of copyright terms make a mockery of “for limited Times”. And, objectively, the main effects of current patent and copyright law is to impede progress in science and the useful arts by making derivative works nearly impossible within the law, despite the supposed recognition of fair use.

Sadly the Supreme Court has upheld this insanity.

33 posted on 04/08/2010 1:11:00 PM PDT by itsahoot (Each generation takes to excess, what the previous generation accepted in moderation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: day21221

Nice find (for your first thread)

Welcome to FRee Republic!


34 posted on 04/08/2010 1:12:14 PM PDT by wolfcreek (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lsd7DGqVSIc)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DonaldC

Counts what translation, actually....


35 posted on 04/08/2010 1:16:05 PM PDT by Knitting A Conundrum (Without the Constitution, there is no America!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Logophile

I do. Because the publisher is no longer acting as your agent, but on their own behalf.

The thing that is wrong with the current arrangement is brought into sharp focus by the case of Robert Frost’s poem “Fire and Ice”. The goth band Unto Ashes recorded a song with the poem as lyrics, but that track cannot be released in the U.S. because long ago Robert Frost signed the rights to his works over the Henry Holt & Co. As a result, about 35 years after his death, about 75 years after he penned the poem, a commercial interest prevents its use in derivative works of art.

If your publishers are a**holes like Henry Holt & Co., your works will not be able to be used freely by others years after your death. I hope you see something wrong with that.


36 posted on 04/08/2010 1:23:56 PM PDT by The_Reader_David (And when they behead your own people in the wars which are to come, then you will know. . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: RoadTest

Ah, one can copyright a typesetting of a text, and even a font! New printings of old books always retypeset them then copyright the combination of text and font. (I am not kidding.)


37 posted on 04/08/2010 1:27:10 PM PDT by The_Reader_David (And when they behead your own people in the wars which are to come, then you will know. . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: day21221

HA! The top-secret draft of a global treaty on Copyrights looks like it was stolen with a P2P file sharing program. LOL!


38 posted on 04/08/2010 1:32:17 PM PDT by Buckeye McFrog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: itsahoot

True but the Supreme Court justices are not gods and have flip flopped decisions in the past.


39 posted on 04/08/2010 1:32:36 PM PDT by a fool in paradise (VP Biden on Obamacare's passage: "This is a big f-ing deal". grumpygresh: "Repeal the f-ing deal")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Buckeye McFrog

>HA! The top-secret draft of a global treaty on Copyrights looks like it was stolen with a P2P file sharing program. LOL!

Now let’s spread it with BitTorrent! ;)


40 posted on 04/08/2010 1:46:13 PM PDT by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: a fool in paradise

I’m not sure. The DRAFT agreement has Section 4: Special Measures Related Technological Enforcement Means and the Internet. See Page 24.

“Fair Use” is mentioned in Para 3 on Page 26. As best I currently understand this DRAFT agreement, the prevailing country’s law would be the key determination in deciding the IP infringement and/or any enforcement.


41 posted on 04/08/2010 1:46:29 PM PDT by luckybogey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: luckybogey

This article mentions that that Canada’s fair use of backing up DVDs for personal use is not recognized internationally.


42 posted on 04/08/2010 1:56:28 PM PDT by a fool in paradise (VP Biden on Obamacare's passage: "This is a big f-ing deal". grumpygresh: "Repeal the f-ing deal")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: day21221
Punishment for repeat offenders includes a ban from the using the Internet for up to 12 months.

Bwahh! Ha! Ha! I would like to see them enforce that, since you can get on the internet with most cell phones or game systems and most coffee shops and restaurants provide free Wi-Fi.

PS, if you don't want border guards snooping through your files, encrypt them with a freeware program such as truecrypt, which prides it's self on being virtually uncrackable and NOT providing any form of back door to governemnt or law enforcement

43 posted on 04/08/2010 2:02:20 PM PDT by apillar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DonaldC
“Would the Bible fall under a copyright protected document? Any way the government could regulate that?”

All except the 1611 King James version.

This translation of the Holy Bible is in the Public Domain, except for in Great Britain. http://www.searchgodsword.org/info/copyright/bible/kjv.html

44 posted on 04/08/2010 2:03:15 PM PDT by Balding_Eagle (Overproduction, one of the top five worries of the American Farmer each and every year..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: The_Reader_David

“Ah, one can copyright a typesetting of a text, and even a font! New printings of old books always retypeset them then copyright the combination of text and font. (I am not kidding.)”

The lawyers do it again.


45 posted on 04/08/2010 2:08:33 PM PDT by RoadTest (Religion is a substitute for the relationship God wants with you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs

ping


46 posted on 04/08/2010 2:47:22 PM PDT by GOPJ (http://hisz.rsoe.hu/alertmap/index2.php?area=dam&lang=eng)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The_Reader_David
Ah, one can copyright a typesetting of a text, and even a font! New printings of old books always retypeset them then copyright the combination of text and font. (I am not kidding.)

Ain't technology grand!

I feel as you do (#14) - the right belongs to the individual, not a corporate entity. You can thank a scummy clerk in the US Supreme Court for setting up the mess.

47 posted on 04/08/2010 3:10:28 PM PDT by brityank (The more I learn about the Constitution, the more I realise this Government is UNconstitutional !! )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: day21221

bump for later..........


48 posted on 04/08/2010 4:14:51 PM PDT by indthkr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: a fool in paradise

so somebody invents a scrubbing tool.


49 posted on 04/08/2010 4:20:08 PM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: day21221

Eventually copyright will become so draconian and disconnected from reality (not that it already hasn’t, mind you), that we’re all just going to completely ignore it. There is no legitimate reason for a copyright that extends beyond 30 years. Screw Disney and the rat.


50 posted on 04/08/2010 7:46:54 PM PDT by zeugma (Waco taught me everything I needed to know about the character of the U.S. Government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-60 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson