Go to Prison for File Sharing? That's What Hollywood Wants in the TPP Deal • Hacker News Board

Re: Go to Prison for File Sharing? That's What Hollywood Wants in the TPP Deal

#51

Post by elementalest » Fri, Feb 20, 2015, 10:11 AM UTC

TheSpiceIsLife wrote: post #32

elementalest wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They will likely throw a few major offenders in jail as exemplars. For the rest they will probably use various (im-proportionately) large fines to continue to discourage people from filesharing. "How can law enforcement possibly police this?" Given that breaching copyright would be classified as a criminal offence with the TPP, and meta-data access is only for criminal purposes, meta-data and an automated system can…

> Given that breaching copyright would be classified as a criminal offence with the TPP, and meta-data access is only for criminal purposes, meta-data and an automated system can be used. So once the system is in place, very easily. Okay sure. But this requires me to believe that software developers won't come up with a protocol that anonymises and encrypts my pirate downloads, thereby rendering meta-data and automat…

I don't think Hollywood thinks it can catch tech savvy people like us here. They want to catch and deter non tech savvy people.

Sure, the non tech savvy people can learn how to circumvent detection by using a VPN from others who know, but this then creates a barrier. It requires an account with montly/yearly subscription. This also leaves a trail. If enough people are using a VPN povider (thats within the US reach) just like ISP's they can request user details, linking a credit card to an IP address. Of course you could use bit coins, but then this is another barrier which will likely deter many people.

Even if it only works for a few years becuase some amazing crypto software is developed and makes it imposible to track people, they will have gotten the message across to most people in the mean time. It will also likely only be a matter of time before someone figures out a way to circumvent the crytpo.

Stating hackers don't stop from the threat of jail even for minor things, and implying it will be the same for filesharing is stretching it. Cybercrime is fundamentally different to filesharing. Different people and different scenarios.

Re: Go to Prison for File Sharing? That's What Hollywood Wants in the TPP Deal

#52

Post by dwdd3 » Fri, Feb 20, 2015, 10:26 AM UTC

ekianjo wrote: post #28

acd wrote: post #22

What I do not like about these deals which always have funny acronyms TPP, ACTA, SOPA is that they are done in secrecy. If the one who are drafting these agreements are acting in the publics best interest, why are the deals and drafts drawn up in secret? If you have nothing to hide and have good honest intentions why hide your drafts? That makes me come to the conclusion that the deals they are drafting are not in th…

> the public will know anyway. Yes, but that does not mean the public can actually do something about it (not saying we should not try, though). Political lobbies can be more powerful than citizens, it would not be the first time it happens.

Political lobbies can be more powerful than citizens

Political lobbies and Super PACS are made up of citizens, as are corporations and trade associations.

For legal reasons, some of these are entities regarded as people, but there is absolutely no reason for the public to buy into that narrative. Society shows too much deference to the legal fiction that these corporations are living entities.

It would be interesting to see what would happen if the people behind these moves were exposed. I'm not advocating harassment, but having the specific names of the corporate officers disclosed as part of campaigns may help them to understand that their actions can't be shielded behind a corporate identity, and may level the playing-field between "faceless corporations" and the common man.

Re: Go to Prison for File Sharing? That's What Hollywood Wants in the TPP Deal

#53

Post by xnull2guest » Fri, Feb 20, 2015, 10:29 AM UTC

FeeTinesAMady wrote: post #42

xnull2guest wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do not get paid to post to Hacker News. That would be a fun job... but alas I am not that lucky. Why do you think my post was fearmongering, specifically? As per the implication that corporations stand a lot to gain from the TPP - you'll see in my post I've said precisely the same thing. I would agree that there is a trend in the direction of corporate sovereignty - another large trend in this direction is what Bru…

You are using the tactic of trying to seem just like us and agreeing with us that it's bad: "... it comes with certain trojan horses ... such as requirements mentioned in the article for internet service providers to filter and monitor customer traffic." Then, with us convinced that you're firmly on our side, you make the bold statement: "The TPP is important for navigating future global financial and international p…

There is no tactic. That's actually the entire point of the post: that there are both upsides and downsides to the TPP.

Do you deny me a nuanced impression of the TPP? Do I have to come down firmly on one side, cherishing everything about it or rejecting it in it's entirety?

The entire point of the post is to describe what I understand to be important and good about the TPP and also what I consider to be harmful or dangerous. I don't think it's misleading not to have a black or white view - in fact I think it is misleading to be so binary.

I believe that the TPP is important for the future economic viability of the United States. I included some reasons why in that post, and also in other branches of the discussion. I would also be willing to discuss further here.

> This is your fearmongering: "it is dangerous to be a single issue voter."

I honestly think that is just common wisdom - being politically engaged means trying to engage with the full complexity of the issues of the times.

> Nowhere in your previous post or this one do you come up with ONE justification for that, or for your statement that the TPP is important and necessary. Nowhere.

Certainly I do not provide evidence in the prior post that single issue voting is harmful. I wasn't aware that was widely contested and in need of justification.

Regarding the importance of the TPP - I do argue in the parent comment and in the branches of ensuing conversation (I hope successfully) that trade deals in the Asia-Pacific are important. I'm not exactly alone: here's a podcast from the Center for Strategic and International Studies (US Gov thinktank) that discusses current TPP prospects: http://csis.org/multimedia/cogitasia-podcast-tpp-prospects-p...

Re: Go to Prison for File Sharing? That's What Hollywood Wants in the TPP Deal

#54

Post by task_queue » Fri, Feb 20, 2015, 11:16 AM UTC

acd wrote: post #22

What I do not like about these deals which always have funny acronyms TPP, ACTA, SOPA is that they are done in secrecy. If the one who are drafting these agreements are acting in the publics best interest, why are the deals and drafts drawn up in secret? If you have nothing to hide and have good honest intentions why hide your drafts? That makes me come to the conclusion that the deals they are drafting are not in th…

The point is that it's already drafted and enacted by the time its made public and there is not much that can be done after being signed.

It doesn't matter that the public knows at that point. It will have been enacted and no heads will roll.

Re: Go to Prison for File Sharing? That's What Hollywood Wants in the TPP Deal

#55

Post by Silhouette » Fri, Feb 20, 2015, 11:41 AM UTC

walterbell wrote: post #9

venomsnake wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it needs public input while is held in the secret?

We need people to call and write their representatives. Europe has moved towards greater transparency and received 150,000 public comments, http://www.computerworlduk.com/blogs/open-enterprise/ttip-up... "The Commissioner outlined two main proposals for boosting transparency. First, to extend access to TTIP texts to all Members of the European Parliament, beyond the currently limited group of Members of the European…

I'm not sure the European powers that be are as transparent about TTIP in practice as the spin might suggest, though:

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/transatlantic-trade-and-i...

"In a meeting in London today (16 February 2015) Vince Cable and UK Trade Minister Lord Livingston will ask Commissioner Malmström to give senior UK parliamentarians access to TTIP treaty text as it is developed, so that they can monitor progress and ask questions on the public’s behalf."

That is, in the UK even senior members of our own national government don't know what we're supposedly signing up for with TTIP.

Given that:

- we have an election coming up in less than three months

- the outcome of that election is probably the most unpredictable in living memory

- TTIP is already perceived by a significant proportion of the general public to be a threat to "national treasures" like the NHS

- depending on the outcome of the election it is quite possible we will have a referendum on leaving the EU entirely within the lifetime of the next government

these kinds of shenanigans seem likely to push the UK public even further towards leaving the EU.

Re: Go to Prison for File Sharing? That's What Hollywood Wants in the TPP Deal

#56

Post by FeeTinesAMady » Fri, Feb 20, 2015, 11:45 AM UTC

xnull2guest wrote: post #53

FeeTinesAMady wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are using the tactic of trying to seem just like us and agreeing with us that it's bad: "... it comes with certain trojan horses ... such as requirements mentioned in the article for internet service providers to filter and monitor customer traffic." Then, with us convinced that you're firmly on our side, you make the bold statement: "The TPP is important for navigating future global financial and international p…

There is no tactic. That's actually the entire point of the post: that there are both upsides and downsides to the TPP. Do you deny me a nuanced impression of the TPP? Do I have to come down firmly on one side, cherishing everything about it or rejecting it in it's entirety? The entire point of the post is to describe what I understand to be important and good about the TPP and also what I consider to be harmful or d…

> There is no tactic

Actually, I've reconsidered. You admit to the realpolitik of the TPP and you admit to how it is try to sabotage China's self-governance (re. intellectual property, which they are MUCH better off without). But you aren't doing so with the point of view of admitting the bad parts of the TPP. You actually think these are good things.

In fact, your entire post is downplaying the negative impacts of the TPP and trying to end on an up note "it's good! It's necessary! "Navigating future global financial and international policy options"! "Major strategic opportunities"! You never list even one! Not even in this response. "I believe that the TPP is important for the future economic viability of the United States." Not a single justification for that. You just keep repeating it, instead. That's the Big Lie method. Keep repeating it until people start to believe it.

> I believe that the TPP is important for the future economic viability of the United States. I included some reasons why in that post, and also in other branches of the discussion. I would also be willing to discuss further here.

You included NO reasons in that post, and no reasons in this one, either. Eventually, in another post, you state that you think it will help "the dollar, US bonds and Western financial institutions". Western financial institutions! Those are the people we want to help now? The people who caused the global economic crisis and got away with it richer than ever?

All of your posts in this thread fit a pattern. You respond to some criticism about the TPP, and you say "I agree!" Then you ignore it and say that the TPP is good. Every post. Repeating it. Repetition. The Big Lie.

If you agree with all of these criticisms, how can you then state that you think it's a net positive? Wait, you say right here: "It is, however, a keystone effort to establish a primary trade treaty in the region at a time it may be otherwise denied from." It almost seems like you think that ANY treaty in Asia would be a good thing. Any US influence at all. And you agree with all the criticisms, and they just don't matter to you. Give up democracy and give up sovereignty, and give corporations their power over national governments. Who cares? We get a treaty out of it. And just getting that makes losing everything else worth it.

> Certainly I do not provide evidence in the prior post that single issue voting is harmful.

Being a single issue voter, while not without drawbacks, means that you can focus your vote on that single issue. And this issue is more important than anything else right now. So single issue voting on this one issue, if the voting is against it, is actually a very good thing.

You won't agree with any of that, though, and I don't care. This is for the rest of the readers.

Re: Go to Prison for File Sharing? That's What Hollywood Wants in the TPP Deal

#57

Post by mercurial » Fri, Feb 20, 2015, 12:36 PM UTC

walterbell wrote: post #33

mercurial wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AFAIK, the ISDS has been met with enough opposition that it has been essentially expunged from the treaty.

References would be helpful, the citation above is only a week old, and Computerworld has been following the subject closely.

It looks like I misremembered. The result of the public consultation was overly against ISDS, but the setback was less major that I thought.

Re: Go to Prison for File Sharing? That's What Hollywood Wants in the TPP Deal

#58

Post by jerf » Fri, Feb 20, 2015, 1:37 PM UTC

walterbell wrote: post #39

ekianjo wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the public will know anyway. Yes, but that does not mean the public can actually do something about it (not saying we should not try, though). Political lobbies can be more powerful than citizens, it would not be the first time it happens.

> that does not mean the public can actually do something about it If public businesses and consumers believe they can or cannot do something about it, they are correct (remember SOPA/PIPA? http://www.capitalnewyork.com/article/media/2012/01/5094412/... ). Choosing which something is the important part. Learning about the proposals is a start. Why did most countries drop their opposition to criminalization proposals?…

This trick is rapidly getting on to my list of Tricks I'd Ban In My Alternate-Universe Constitution: No passing laws that take effect so far into the future that you won't be around to take the heat when it gets implemented. Hammering that down into something solid would take some work... I deleted what was turning into a multi-paragraph exploration of that. But it breaks the electoral feedback loop that is so critical to Democracy for laws to come into effect that just sort of happen with nobody to point at... it's not the current guy's fault, it's not those old guy's responsibility, it's not just "the Bureaucracy", shrug guess you're just stuck with it, citizens...!

Re: Go to Prison for File Sharing? That's What Hollywood Wants in the TPP Deal

#59

Post by empressplay » Fri, Feb 20, 2015, 1:57 PM UTC

The average user can avoid prosecution by setting their torrent client's upload speed to 0. No upload == no share, and besides, the folks 'capturing' IP addresses need to get a "clandestine" packet from you before they can put you on the naughty list (since they can't send _you_ a clandestine packet, for obvious reasons.)

Don't need a VPN, just don't upload.

Re: Go to Prison for File Sharing? That's What Hollywood Wants in the TPP Deal

#60

Post by spoiledtechie » Fri, Feb 20, 2015, 1:58 PM UTC

acd wrote: post #22

What I do not like about these deals which always have funny acronyms TPP, ACTA, SOPA is that they are done in secrecy. If the one who are drafting these agreements are acting in the publics best interest, why are the deals and drafts drawn up in secret? If you have nothing to hide and have good honest intentions why hide your drafts? That makes me come to the conclusion that the deals they are drafting are not in th…

You should go vote for Obama. Everyone knows he was supposed to make things transparent. Too bad he went the other way.