http://www.anti-acta.com/

The ACTA Treaty has leaked.
You guys should read this, as it will probably affect a lot of us and possibly this site.

Oh, and they've been keeping it out of the media so they can pull a fast one on us when they vote on it next month.

Spread to the word!

Lol, why do people hate piracy so much :/

Fox2K9 said:
Lol, why do people hate piracy so much :/

Their basically saying if someone owns anything on the internet the owner has more of a right to make you get rid of it and sue you all to make their delicious money back.

Ex: Lets say someone accidentally posts some sexyfur and they find out that its on here before it gets deleted they could sue the site and shut it down on the first instance they get. Or for those of you who illegally download rapidshares for free music or whatever, the government has all the right to search your computer and if they find out you have that on your hard-drive, they can reach their dirty little hands in there pull it out and save it for a record, delete it from your computer, and make you pay all of the companies there money back and for some people that could be thousands of dollars.

To answer you question piracy is illegal and you have a right to own the rights to anything original you created and no one has the right to take that away from you.

Freyawolf said:

When does this vote take place? :s

http://www.anti-acta.com/index.php?limitstart=5&lang=en
There's moar on page 2.

I don't know about the European Nation but, USA is protesting on October 29th (elections are November 2nd)

Worldwide protests, including US, planned for November 5th.

Oh, and for everyone, tell everybody that you know so we could help ratify this treaty, to keep the dumb ass government from screwing everyone over all around the world.

D: but I likes my moosic...It keeps me all sane and stuff...T_T and the fact that they can do stuff w/out a trial infringes all of my American rights. >:( I AM NOT OKAY WITH THIS.

skeeter said:
To answer you question piracy is illegal and you have a right to own the rights to anything original you created and no one has the right to take that away from you.

Wrong. There are many cases where that right can and should be taken away, such as fair use (parody, education, review) and copyright term expiration. This is really the core problem with ACTA, and with the copyright lobby in general: they defend the rights of artists (well, really the rights of corporations to exploit artists, but eh) but give no space for the counter-balancing rights of the public. We all participate in art, as a culture, and copyright law should be about finding a fair compromise for everyone involved, not simply "protecting" one group.

skeeter said:
To answer you question piracy is illegal and you have a right to own the rights to anything original you created and no one has the right to take that away from you.

I don't believe in intellectual property. Patent law is a mess, and needs to be ridden of. Copyright law needs to be overhauled, and corporations shouldn't be allowed to lobby for copyright extensions (or at all, for that matter).

<em>ACTA gives recording industries more rights to enforce copyrights and officers of the law the right to search any digital device for copyrighted material. Did you pay for the songs on your iPod? Under the new law, that instantly classifies you as a criminal, and the same classification as murderers and rapists. You will get a criminal record. Even if you do not download songs onto your iPod, you will feel the effects as millions, possibly billions of dollars in taxpayer's money will be poured in to catch these "criminals", money that can be used to save lives.</em>

Is that actually going to be enforced? How is a cop just going to stop you and go through your iPos and arrest you? I think this is all just fear-mongering...

WolfieWolfie1992 said:

Is that actually going to be enforced? How is a cop just going to stop you and go through your iPos and arrest you? I think this is all just fear-mongering...

From what I understand the government is going to without a warrant have some one run threw every suspected persons hard-drives for the information. Which is a huge invasion of your personal privacy.

Arresting people for MP3's? ...and what if they refuse to go to court or pay the fine (I would)? Just where are they going to put all these new "criminals"? If you thought prisons are overcrowded now...

This is kinda like the Y2K...all this hype and paranoia over it, and then....nothing happens.

But if it does, then, well, we can pray to God almighty, and let's hope The Supreme Court protects us (for you USA users at least)

I don't know, house arrest maybe or the IRS will come and take your computer away

arc said:
I don't believe in intellectual property. Patent law is a mess, and needs to be ridden of. Copyright law needs to be overhauled, and corporations shouldn't be allowed to lobby for copyright extensions (or at all, for that matter).

So are you suggesting the copyright laws need an overhaul, in a manner that would somehow do away with intellectual property rights?

I don't think you're taking into account the scope of products that constitute "intellectual property." Almost everything we use everyday was at some point a concept, most likely a concept on paper on in a computer.

By your reasoning, I can take your concept or design for my own, as long as I do it before your mockup becomes a physical item.

Just so its made clear, as an American, this is an ongoing Trend with Obama. He started to infringe on our second amendment rights to privately own guns by trying to make the reselling and packing of your own ammo illegal. Almost every state said, kindly, fuck you. So what did Obama do? We're now trying to sign on, and by We, I mean Clinton and Obama, to the UN's "Global Small Arms Ban." So if he can't sink his shot in his own country, he has some deluded idea that a "Global Ban" would make is pay attention.

The same thing goes wit this ACTA bullshit. I used to live in Miami, where there are no cameras to catch you running a red light. There was talk of putting them in, but between the AMOUNT of traffic violations per light, per hour, per day, compiled with the amount of illegal immigrants and cubans who just don't care and ditch the car, not only would it not be worth the effort, but the Police Department for the STATE would automatically be 2 years backlogged on the first day, processing fines, tracking down addresses, and creating tickets.

The great thing about the internet, and 'priacy' is that for everyone 1 person hired to find a way to stop us from using this super highway, there are 100,000 who are waiting to counter that one person. I live in Vermont, USA now. You think the VT state police are going to go out of their way with the EXPLODING Meth, Pill, and Crack Cocaine problem, to track down some pre pubescent child who didn't want to pay 15 bucks (13 of which goes to the LABEL, not the band) just to get "The Catalyst" and downloaded it instead? Oh, and yeah, if LEGALY buying music and putting it on your Ipod/Iphone/MP3 player makes it illegal, congrats, you have upwards of 2 BILLION convicts equal to murderers and rapists walking around this world. Good luck.

Obama, in the US, talked about redoing the Internet Infrastructure to rebuild it with a monitoring system that would be akin to the CC Video Surveillance in London, UK. The price tag on JUST the US? $900 Trillion. I have no hope that this wont be passed, I have every hope that this as unenforceable as anything could be.

hey look politics =P
me and you share the same thoughts tara....

The reality of the situation is that even if the law is passed it is an untenable situation. They simply do not have the time, or the resources to deal with the situation.

The only real option they have is to censor the internet, but you know that's not even much of an option since it would in short order bring down the global economy.

The real problem here is that we've allowed businessmen to dictate the direction and flow of law. This should never be the case.

Personally, I'm mostly appalled at the lack of proper rebellion, a couple hundred years ago, a lack of representation and a tax on luxury goods got enough people up in arms to overthrow the British... and today, even anti-representation (that is to say, representation that is actively against the best interests of the people) and insanely high taxes (on just about everything.) aren't enough to get a nervous twitch out of anyone.

For anyone who says ill of Obama - Just remember, there were no good options. The system is broken. Garbage in, garbage out.

Tara_Lynne said:
Just so its made clear, as an American, this is an ongoing Trend with Obama. He started to infringe on our second amendment rights to privately own guns

Good. Maybe you'll join the civilised world some day.

Hat said:
Good. Maybe you'll join the civilised world some day.

Civilized you mean?
Sorry, that was me being inane.
Does it matter wither you (or anyone else) thinks it's 'civilized' to let civilians own guns? No. It doesn't matter at all. It has to do with rights. So what if I'm uncivilized for owning a gun? I'm -allowed- to own a gun, and that's what matters. It has nothing to do with the gun itself, and everything to do with freedom. If you can't understand that, you're just obtuse.

Ya know what, who's up for a real change; let's fire everyone in the US's senate and The house of representatives and I can garentee everyone that those guys who only care about their intrests and their money, not what's good for the nation but, what's good for themselves in the moment, will be sad and wish they had taken more of an intrest in the common people problems instead of caring for themselves. Because with new people comes new ideas and possibly a better out come twards repairing the the impending hell hole that they made this country into.

How are we "uncivilized" for owning guns, when guns are pretty much what helped us win our freedom from the Bitchish? Whoops, I mean British.

Lunato said:
Civilized you mean?
Sorry, that was me being inane.
Does it matter wither you (or anyone else) thinks it's 'civilized' to let civilians own guns? No. It doesn't matter at all. It has to do with rights. So what if I'm uncivilized for owning a gun? I'm -allowed- to own a gun, and that's what matters. It has nothing to do with the gun itself, and everything to do with freedom. If you can't understand that, you're just obtuse.

What about the right to live in a safe environment? Your arrogant demand to have access to something with only the capacity to kill and damn the consequences is not what I would expect from civilised society.

Moreover, clinging to a set of centuries-old laws like they were the most scared of texts is something I would only expect from Middle-Eastern theocratic states.

Ultima_Weapon said:
Bitchish

Well, that sure showed me. This is a very mature comment that demonstrates you are someone who can handle the responsibility of handling lethal devices.

Hat said:
What about the right to live in a safe environment? Your arrogant demand to have access to something with only the capacity to kill and damn the consequences is not what I would expect from civilised society.

Only the capacity to kill? How the fuck do you think our forefathers ate? They sure didn't survive off of berries and grass. And they sure didn't keep warm with leaves either. They ate the fucking meat, and wore the fur and leather, from the animal that they killed, with bows and arrows(which gave rise to guns). And how do the police rescue hostages and keep you safe? How do soldiers defend their countries? With Cease and Desist letters or by saying pretty please? No.

Hat said:
Moreover, clinging to a set of centuries-old laws like they were the most scared of texts is something I would only expect from Middle-Eastern theocratic states.

Last time I remember, the commandments in the bible like "Thou shalt not kill" hold pretty strong to this day.

Hat said:
Well, that sure showed me. This is a very mature comment that demonstrates you are someone who can handle the responsibility of handling lethal devices.

Stop bitching. You lost an arguement on the internet by arguing an obviously moot point. Get over it. There is a place called the real world. You should by some real estate there.

i think that living in this nation without right to bear arms is scarier then with right now =P
even if it was banned people would still buy/sell them leaving the innocent even more defenseless

Ultima_Weapon said:
Only the capacity to kill? How the fuck do you think our forefathers ate? They sure didn't survive off of berries and grass. And they sure didn't keep warm with leaves either. They ate the fucking meat, and wore the fur and leather, FROM THE ANIMAL THAT THEY KILLED, with bows and arrows(which gave rise to guns).

Contradiction highlighted for you. Also, welcome to the 21st century, where all our food is mass-produced and nobody has to hunt. Appealing to the past, where people were indeed less civilised, doesn't help you.

Ultima_Weapon said:
And how do the police rescue hostages and keep you safe? How do soldiers defend their countries? With Cease and Desist letters or by saying pretty please? No.

Now that's entirely different. Well-trained personnel who can be relied upon to keep their equipment safe and only use them when necessary. Unlike the average person, who wants a gun for the sake of having one and can freely leave it just lying on a table with no accountability until something terrible happens.

And then you can just blame it on video games.

Ultima_Weapon said:
Last time I remember, the commandments in the bible like "Thou shalt not kill" hold pretty strong to this day.

Well then, what use do you have for a gun?
Also, if you want to follow them, then make sure you follow them all, including "Do not have any other gods before me" (Prohibiting freedom of religion), "Do not take the name of the Lord in vain" and I hope you never work on a Sunday.

Old laws, old times. Try living in the modern world.

Dude, you can't even spell "civilized". It was pointed out and corrected for you in an earlier post, which you obviously didn't read. While we don't have to hunt or shoot the animals, we just bludgeon them to death with mallets, or just cut off their heads. Do you want to ban mallets and kitchen knives too? And why does anyone own a gun? For protection, collection, and sport. You are obviously a throwback from the victorian times. You couldn't argue your way out of a piss-filled kiddie pool. The real world, lease an apartment there.

Hat said:
What about the right to live in a safe environment? Your arrogant demand to have access to something with only the capacity to kill and damn the consequences is not what I would expect from civilised society.

Moreover, clinging to a set of centuries-old laws like they were the most scared of texts is something I would only expect from Middle-Eastern theocratic states.

Well, that sure showed me. This is a very mature comment that demonstrates you are someone who can handle the responsibility of handling lethal devices.

I assume you're from a country that has already put a ban on public owned guns but let me spell it out for you.
America is a country of slippery slopes. I'll admit, most of us are less educated than most other countries. Hell, it's one of the big things that makes me angry about America.

I own a gun because of protection.

Let's give you this:
Guns are illegal. I'm a woman walking in a parking garage in a large city. A man who is much larger than me comes up with a knife to assault me. He doesn't want my wallet, he wants something far more important to me. He wants to rape and kill me.

What are my options?
Mace? Illegal in most of America
Pepper-spray? Not effective for long enough in many cases.
Self Defense training? I'm too small and he has a knife, there is not enough training in the world to help me in that.
Run and Scream? I'm most likely not going to get much attention due to the low amount of care that most Americans (and people in general) have. This is especially true in a large city, where my screams are not likely to be heard.

If guns were legal in that situation than my rapist would probably have one. I would too. Likely I would still be in the same problem, but I would have one positive. Shoot the gun to create a noise that -no one- ignores.
When you hear a gunshot what do you do? You call the authorities and immediately get help to the place that the sound originated from.

Back to the Slippery Slope.
Guns are Illegal, well so are all forms of Pepper-spray and Mace (which is illegal in most states anyhow), then we make tasers illegal, pocket knives, and about anything that can be used to 'wound' or 'kill'. Why would this happen? No guns, no reason to have those things.
It's a modern world, right? We should all totally get along and not have any animosity toward other people.

Wake up, we are not some magical race of peace loving people. Why can't the world have peace? Because peace is impossible for the human race. We feed off of violence and anger.

Oh, you'll have to excuse me for being raised in England and being taught how to spell things in true English. I thought most people were aware of the differences across boarders, but ah well. Ignorance of our own language remains your failure.

As for announcing yourself winner, you've got to do better than that, man. You've got to refuse my actual points, rather than just declaring that I suck at arguing.

Ultima_Weapon said:
And why does anyone own a gun? For protection, collection, and sport.

This. The vast majority of legal gun owners are lawful, responsible people. Unfortunately, making guns illegal doesn't necessarily take them out of the hands of criminals. It does two things: it creates a black market for firearms where criminals can find guns illegally, and it turns otherwise law-abiding citizens into criminals when they fear gun violence enough to buy an illegal gun themselves.

But even if the U.S. were to enact similar legislation, how practical would it be to enforce when we have 50 times the land area to scour, including two massive borders, one of which is absolutely rife with violent crime and smuggling, yet of no interest whatsoever to our federal politicians? Sweeping gun legislation, unless supplemented by an equally sweeping increase in police and border security, would only remove guns from the hands of people who willingly surrender them. I wonder if it would suffice to simply increase the number of police and border patrol agents, without actually removing a time-honored freedom and means of personal defense from U.S. citizens?

And while the per capita murder rate may be higher in the U.S. than the U.K., here's an interesting factoid:
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_per_of_saf_wal_in_dar-crime-perception-safety-walking-dark

Why do 82% of U.S. citizens feel safe walking at night, compared to 70% in the U.K.?

It might have something to do with RDS reports showing 2,164,000 "violent incidents" happening in the 07-08 reporting year, compared to 1,408,337 reported incidents of "violent crime" in the most comparable year of FBI crime data, even though the U.S. has 5 times the population.
http://rds.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs08/hosb0708.pdf
http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2008/data/table_01.html

I find this interesting, because while it shows that a person is more likely be murdered in the U.S. than the U.K., the odds of a falling victim to any sort of violent crime is actually very much the reverse. Which is "better"? Well, I guess that's a place where reasonable disagreement can occur.

I'm sorry I couldn't find more up-to-date information from the RDS regarding violent crime. You're welcome to give it a shot at http://rds.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/index.html.

Le sigh. Trolls.

Typical English. Full of themselves, as always.

Let's play. A: You have no qualifications to assess whether or not anyone on this board is qualified to handle a lethal weapon. But, you being from your 'civilised' country, I can assure you that -you- are not, thus: "Pot to Kettle, your hue is disturbing."

B: Many of us -are- in fact qualified to handle a weapon. I myself am qualified to use many forms of knives and batons, as I was trained in them, disdaining guns myself. As I understand it, knife and blunt-object related crime in non-armed countries in European nations has pretty much taken over the statistic where guns would be normally used. So, yeah, you're an idiot. Take away guns, and people will use nunchaku, shivs, knives, lead pipes, a big purple dildo, whatever. They will still kill. It'll just be harder to hear them. As Soup once said: "Guns for show, Knives for a pro. Knives are good, they're quiet. Makes you more likely to use them."

Now: "Now that's entirely different. Well-trained personnel who can be relied upon to keep their equipment safe and only use them when necessary. Unlike the average person, who wants a gun for the sake of having one and can freely leave it just lying on a table with no accountability until something terrible happens."

You are aware that most municipalities that issue CCW licenses require you to take training courses, I hope. But I'd also like to counter that if you consider your average rifleman straight of basic training in ANY military "well-trained", you sir, are delusional. Basic training is a familiarity and conditioning course. It's BASIC. Even an AIT trained rifleman is no more responsible than your average citizen, and sometimes less!

... You people do realize you're entirely off-topic, right?

On-topic: European parliament passes anti-ACTA declaration.
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2010/09/european-parliament-passes-anti-acta-declaration.ars

Now if only the U.S. Congress would do the same.

Lets all just ignore hat. He's an idiotic troll who should die in a chemical fire. Carry on people.

Ultima_Weapon said:
Lets all just ignore hat. He's an idiotic troll who should die in a chemical fire. Carry on people.

Or maybe you could respect his opinion and not try to degrade him and throw around words like 'idiotic'. You're being quite childish.

I agree with hat, but I'm not going to sit here and call you an 'idiotic troll who should die in a chemical fire.' Respect your opponents as well as your allies. Respect leads to reasonable debate, which is what you should strive for in a conversation like this.

The flaming is getting pretty ridiculous. (Oh and it's spelled civilised.)

Some times I wander what happened to the glorious ban-wagen that e621 was known for. You know the one that kept the idiotic trolls and all the plain old dumb-asses who make stupid childish comments about irrelevent things, out of here, so that regular civilized people (and it's "civilized" just type it in the google) can get back to the regular schedualed programing (topic.)

seriously people, this treaty could possibly affect us all.

Jesus christ it's either civilized or civilised depending on what part of the world you live in.

Now I suggest the flaming stops right here.

skeeter said:
Some times I wander what happened to the glorious ban-wagen that e621 was known for.

That was mellis :(

Ultima_Weapon said:
That was mellis :(

Sorry but no it wasn't, just one caring individual who wouldn't like to see a good furry site go down the toilet by all, or mostly all, it's own members redundant comments but, on the other side, I am friends with mellis and some of e621's previous staff on FA.

Ultima_Weapon said:
That was mellis :(

Shit, I thought it was only Arcturus?

Oh, it was all of them. And I realize that we probably aren't going to see anymore awesome ban reasons, either. forum #4643 is going to die, and that makes me T.T

Well if varka, Char and the rest of the staff can keep up to e621's normal standards of epic bans maybe, we can can keep that 10% ban rate up there and keep this site free of any creaps, freaks, or just plain old strange people who don't belong, or deserve the right to comment, here.