Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

New Trans-Pacific Partnership Leak Means ‘Significant Overhaul’ for Canadian Law

motherboard.vice.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 98 posts

Re: New Trans-Pacific Partnership Leak Means ‘Significant Overhaul’ for Canadian Law

#41

Post by walterbell »

rayiner wrote: post #38
walterbell wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From http://america.aljazeera.com/opinions/2015/7/stop-treating-c... "When people are framed as consumers, society becomes little more than a marketplace. Social problems get treated with individualized, market-oriented solutions — where each consumer-citizen is solely responsible for spotting deceptive practices and avoiding unfair schemes — instead of collective, rights-based protections. When the private sector en…

How is that applicable here? What political rights are in play here? We're talking about entertainment, about as purely commercial a product as you can get. We're not talking about healthcare or water or food or housing.

The EFF has kindly created a youth education project on the topic of legal rights related to the history of innovation and copyright law, fair use, free speech and the public domain. From http://www.teachingcopyright.org/

"Kids and teens are bombarded with messages from a myriad of sources that using new technology is high-risk behavior. Downloading music is compared to stealing a bicycle — even though many downloads are lawful. Making videos using short clips from other sources is treated as probably illegal — even though many such videos are also lawful."

Re: New Trans-Pacific Partnership Leak Means ‘Significant Overhaul’ for Canadian Law

#42

Post by rayiner »

nitrogen wrote: post #39
rayiner wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> At this point, piracy is the only ethical solution to obtaining such content, as giving these companies money is immoral and supports people who threaten and ruin people's lives for profit. I don't understand this rationale at all. Surely the solution to an industry whose business practices you don't like is to stop using their products . Indeed, your rationale is one reason why Hollywood has so much power. Piracy…

When effective cultural participation requires keeping up to date with at least some of Hollywood's products, choosing not to view/listen is the same as choosing to be just that much more socially disconnected. See Moxie Marlinspike's presentation about this concept applied to technology: http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=eG0KrT6pBPk When one oligopoly owns the vast majority of contemporary popular culture, we, the popula…

People aren't pirating culture, they're pirating Mission Impossible. It's action-porn. It's a packaged entertainment-product. You're talking about peoples' right to food while defending their stealing Twinkies.

Re: New Trans-Pacific Partnership Leak Means ‘Significant Overhaul’ for Canadian Law

#43

Post by api »

jakejake wrote: post #32
joesmo wrote: post #22

So they're criminalizing yet another everyday activity that hurts no one and is already protected by civil law. It seems to me the US and its puppet follower states just love the idea of criminalizing things that occur naturally, hurt no one, and in their enforcement and chaos bring in billions of dollars in profit off of ruining people's lives. This has now been the norm for almost two decades and the movie / music…

If you feel that way and don't want to support the industry, the real ethical thing to do is to not watch or listen to their products. Only support artists who are releasing their material under terms that you agree with.

Also important to note that even if you pirate, you are increasing a film or album's viral coefficient and possibly helping verbally promote it. So yeah, if you hate an industry boycott it. Remove it from your life.

Re: New Trans-Pacific Partnership Leak Means ‘Significant Overhaul’ for Canadian Law

#45

Post by AnimalMuppet »

tptacek wrote: post #40
nitrogen wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When effective cultural participation requires keeping up to date with at least some of Hollywood's products, choosing not to view/listen is the same as choosing to be just that much more socially disconnected. See Moxie Marlinspike's presentation about this concept applied to technology: http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=eG0KrT6pBPk When one oligopoly owns the vast majority of contemporary popular culture, we, the popula…

One of my very most successful friends, by far one of the most socially and artistically connected people I know, didn't see Star Wars until his late 30s. He seemed to have suffered for that: not at all. Exactly, in as much detail as you can be patient enough to provide, how does "effective cultural participation" require you to see shitty new-release Hollywood movies? Is Marco Arment culturally disconnected? http://…

When I was growing up, we didn't have a television until partway through junior high. (One of the best moves my parents made.) I kept hearing these conversations in the hallway: "Did you see Starsky & Hutch last night?" (Yes, I really am that old...) I felt a bit left out based on that.

But I felt left out because of a lot of things. I wasn't a member of the dominant religion. I came into that school knowing nobody, because I didn't attend one of the elementary schools that fed into it. I didn't live in the neighborhood (my parents got me to go to that school rather than the one I was geographically supposed to attend because it had fewer knife fights.) And, I was a nerd.

So the actual amount I was "left out of things" because of not having a TV and therefore being unable to effectively culturally participate was... pretty small.

That was in junior high. Today, it's even less relevant to me. There's a conversation about a movie I didn't see? "Nope, didn't see it." If they are uncaring enough to keep having the conversation about that for the next 20 minutes, well, I'll just do something else. Or I'll listen, learn a bit about a movie I didn't see, go to Wikipedia and read about the plot, and save about two hours and $7.

Re: New Trans-Pacific Partnership Leak Means ‘Significant Overhaul’ for Canadian Law

#46

Post by Eye_of_Mordor »

rayiner wrote: post #36
joesmo wrote: post #22

So they're criminalizing yet another everyday activity that hurts no one and is already protected by civil law. It seems to me the US and its puppet follower states just love the idea of criminalizing things that occur naturally, hurt no one, and in their enforcement and chaos bring in billions of dollars in profit off of ruining people's lives. This has now been the norm for almost two decades and the movie / music…

> At this point, piracy is the only ethical solution to obtaining such content, as giving these companies money is immoral and supports people who threaten and ruin people's lives for profit. I don't understand this rationale at all. Surely the solution to an industry whose business practices you don't like is to stop using their products . Indeed, your rationale is one reason why Hollywood has so much power. Piracy…

Perhaps choosing the cheapest legal solution is a better middle road?

Re: New Trans-Pacific Partnership Leak Means ‘Significant Overhaul’ for Canadian Law

#47

Post by err4nt »

flycaliguy wrote: post #33

I'm excited to see the TPP potentially become an election issue in the recently ignited campaign. Really hoping the NDP brings both this mess and Bill C-51 up front so maybe we can squeeze some democracy into the process.

From what I've seen, Tom Mulcair is the only Canadian politician that seems to be in favour of the TPP. His criticism of Harper is that Harper is too weak to see it all the way through to a deal (implying an NDP gov't would). Unless he's changed position on that he's the one to avoid on these issues.

Re: New Trans-Pacific Partnership Leak Means ‘Significant Overhaul’ for Canadian Law

#48

Post by err4nt »

antihero wrote: post #44

Why exactly are any governments agreeing to this shit?

I feel like we are watching the sovereignty of nations fade, and watching the baton pass to corporations. The US has invented this industry of Intellectual Property deliberately as a way to extract money from people by limiting their freedoms. As nations become less powerful and corporations become more powerful, the political landscape is shifting. I believe the US is creating the TPP to try to give as much of an advantage to US corporations in that future landscape where corporations are sovereign over nations. The US is trying to intimidate other countries to join on the threat of being cut out of this new exclusive elite they are trying to create if they don't.

I think people are reluctantly agreeing to it because they are afraid of being outcast from future political influence if this TPP deal does go through without them, and nations become less powerful.

Re: New Trans-Pacific Partnership Leak Means ‘Significant Overhaul’ for Canadian Law

#49

Post by tptacek »

rayiner wrote: post #42
nitrogen wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When effective cultural participation requires keeping up to date with at least some of Hollywood's products, choosing not to view/listen is the same as choosing to be just that much more socially disconnected. See Moxie Marlinspike's presentation about this concept applied to technology: http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=eG0KrT6pBPk When one oligopoly owns the vast majority of contemporary popular culture, we, the popula…

People aren't pirating culture, they're pirating Mission Impossible. It's action-porn. It's a packaged entertainment-product. You're talking about peoples' right to food while defending their stealing Twinkies.

My favorite telling detail in this debate is the extent to which people pirate fonts. Fonts. Vanity letter shapes.

Re: New Trans-Pacific Partnership Leak Means ‘Significant Overhaul’ for Canadian Law

#50

Post by rayiner »

Eye_of_Mordor wrote: post #46
rayiner wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> At this point, piracy is the only ethical solution to obtaining such content, as giving these companies money is immoral and supports people who threaten and ruin people's lives for profit. I don't understand this rationale at all. Surely the solution to an industry whose business practices you don't like is to stop using their products . Indeed, your rationale is one reason why Hollywood has so much power. Piracy…

Perhaps choosing the cheapest legal solution is a better middle road?

I'm very sympathetic to that argument. My problem with SOPA was that it forced every ISP to help enforce someone else's property rights.
Post reply on HN