Huh?
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| djohnston Aug 02, 2010 1:43 PM EDT |
I had to read the article again. What does this have to do with Open Source software, or even computing? It doesn't even qualify as a topic for Groklaw. |
| hkwint Aug 02, 2010 1:58 PM EDT |
I guess you're not familiar with ACTA, didn't read about it at Wikipedia, but still want a bit of background. I'm not the most appropriate person to explain, far from. I even didn't read the article though I can guess what it's about, but nonetheless here's a try: Parma, Port and Pizza suffer from piracy, and so do MPAA, RIAA and BSA. Quite simple. More elaborate: You have BSA, RIAA and the like, and their war against 'piracy'. Piracy is about stuff which is copied without permission of the "IP-holders". They lobby governments for stuff like "DMCA" and such. ACTA may lead to new DMCA-like laws. On the other side of the puddle, there's Ferrari, Gucci, Champagne, Port and so on. The manufacturers of these products suffer from 'piracy' too. So, that's why the 'old industry' in the "ancient-world" and the "new industry from Sillicon Valley / Holleywood" joined forces to lobby governments worldwide to make harsher anti-piracy laws. ACTA is the fruit of the labour of the "entire anti-piracy gang". |
| Bob_Robertson Aug 02, 2010 2:33 PM EDT |
> ACTA is the fruit of the labour of the "entire anti-piracy gang". Ganging together to make their lives better at the expense of everyone else. Just another rent-seeking cartel. |
| tuxchick Aug 02, 2010 3:56 PM EDT |
That's a good summary, Hans, ACTA has everything to do with FOSS. |
| tracyanne Aug 02, 2010 5:26 PM EDT |
The article paints a picture that's quite encouraging, there are indications that the ACTA may fail, very good news for FOSS if it does. |
| Sander_Marechal Aug 02, 2010 6:57 PM EDT |
The MAFIAA won't let ACTA fail. So, it becomes a matter of who has got the better lobbyists. Pizza and Parma or the MAFIAA. |
| tuxchick Aug 02, 2010 7:12 PM EDT |
Glyn Moody wrote a piece for Linux Journal some time ago that sums it up:
"Why We Must React to ACTA"
http://www.linuxjournal.com/content/why-we-must-react-acta "The name of the “Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement” – ACTA – is indicative of the overall approach being taken. First, this is a trade agreement, which means that it by-passes many of the more open processes for drawing up international agreements. This has allowed it to be discussed in secret, amongst a cosy club of interested parties and their chums – notably, those in industries based on exploiting intellectual monopolies. " |
| hkwint Aug 02, 2010 7:37 PM EDT |
TA: There are more indicators, as some national governments in the EU managed to read the documents which were deemed 'secret' at first. Also, the Dutch government decided they want to vote about the proposals in the Agreement before turning it into national law. Which means, ACTA won't be turned into law without any interference from national governments. BTW Geographical Indications screw customers as well: -Only Champagne from the region Champagne may be called Champagne, -People know Champagne, because in the past it used to be liquor of good quality, -Nowadays, Champagne from the Champagne region is totally garbage it turned out in 'blind tests', 'sparkling wine' from other regions (Spain, Italy) is far better, and the most expensive Champaign is about the worst, -Still, however, Champagne sells better and brings in more profit because of its name. Here's the result: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1229100/Bargain-cham... I've seen a documentary how there are crofts in the Champaign region, which are not suitable to grow grapes in first place. However, because the garbage coming from those crofts may be sold as Champaign, of course all bad crofts are astronomically expensive. So speaking about MAFIAA, it could better be called the Conpaign region. So, what basically happened, is the 'sparkling wine' from Spain / Italy does more resemble the Champagne of ~1900 A.D then the 2000's Champagne from the Champagne region does. However, most consumers have no clue, and still buy Moet & Chandon. Then, if it's garbage, they think they don't like champaign. And if they don't like champaign, they certainly wouldn't like cheaper sparkling wine. What the 'protected region' does here, is enabling Champagne makers to sit on their *** whole day, produce crap without much efforts - with a state-granted monopoly on the name 'Champagne', and sell it for more money than the Italians / Spaniards who actually did their best and produce better wine. Coincidentally, I'm born in Gouda, a famous 'brand' of cheese. That name however is not protected, and the cheese is manufactured all around the world. I never tasted bad Gouda cheese, no matter where it came from. However, "North Holland Gouda" is a 'protected region'. Which is pretty stupid, because Gouda is located in the province of South Holland, and not in North Holland. How's that? Once, my countries only oenologist (wine yard engineer, Master of Science-grade) told how more wine is made in Bulgaria than in France. However, the stores are full of "French" wine, while there's almost no wine from Bulgaria in stores. Turns out, as he told, big trucks with wine are driving from Bulgaria to France. The wine is bottled in France, and they can put a label "produit de France" on it, probably more than doubling the price. So all the consumer needs is a fair indication where the product is made. Then, the consumer can decide for their own if they like Champagne from Champagne or Champagne from Spain. They can decide if they like Gouda from Gouda, or Gouda from Germany. They can decide if they like French wine from France, or French wine from Bulgaria. They can decide if they like Pizza from Napels or Canada. Honest mentioning of where the product is made, should be the only thing the EU should worry about. The rest is nonsense and not in the interest of citizens. |
| djohnston Aug 02, 2010 11:06 PM EDT |
Thanks, Hans. That puts the story in perspective. |
| TxtEdMacs Aug 03, 2010 8:17 AM EDT |
Hans, Stop It!!! Who needs facts? Particularly when we know what we believe? Facts just muddy the issue. YBT |
| hkwint Aug 03, 2010 9:02 AM EDT |
djohnston: You're welcome!
You're right it's not obvious at all, and surely you're right "food" normally isn't a topic for LXer.
Stories like these should come with a bit of explanation I guess. MBT: Don't be afraid, above is only my 'worthless' opinion which nobody cares about anyway. If I knew any facts, I'd surely prevent them from being mixed up in my political opinions, let's keep those things separated please! |
| TxtEdMacs Aug 03, 2010 10:36 AM EDT |
Hans, The Politics parts are covered in silence ... payoffs work better that way. Less said the better. YBT |
| Bob_Robertson Aug 04, 2010 10:41 AM EDT |
TC, your bringing out Moody's points is appreciated. It's interesting that the ACTA draft back when he was talking about it was done through Wikileaks! It's not just for military "secrets". Speaking of which, this is also bringing together people of various backgrounds. It's interesting to have TC and the Mises folks agreeing on something: ACTA: The War on Progress, Freedom, and Human Civilization http://mises.org/daily/4593 |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!