world-information-sharing

STAFF NEWS & ANALYSIS
TPP to Criminalize Information Sharing
By Daily Bell Staff - February 19, 2016

The article in question, about DeMarcus Cousins showing support for embattled head coach George Karl, was published February 13 … Now when you click on the article on Amico Hoops, it immediately redirects you to Sactown Royalty … it’s probably a lesson learned for Amico’s site. Just because you throw a link up at the bottom doesn’t mean you can just take someone else’s content wholesale and make a profit on it. That’s old school Internet thinking that just doesn’t work anymore. And really, it never did in the first place. – AwfulAnnouncing.com

Never before has it been easier to copy someone’s text and republish it.

But as we can see in this excerpt, some social commentators see the Internet’s ability to replicate and disseminate information as a serious threat to intellectual property.

Of course, the Internet was built on the sharing of many kinds of information – what the excerpt above calls “old school Internet thinking.”

Politicians across the world have long been panicked about the direction in which the Internet is taking us. The latest example of this can be seen in the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) trade treaty, which is currently nearing ratification.

A very significant element of TPP is the continued criminalization of copyright, which used to be a civil matter.

The criminalization of copyright is ongoing but because the sharing of information is such a basic human instinct, the statutes simply haven’t been applied.

People have no idea what has been criminalized, nor their liability. And most provisions are rarely enforced because when they are, the majority opinion is one of shock and indignation.

Back in 2011, law professor John Tehranian wrote a paper entitled, “Infringement Nation: Copyright Reform and the Law/Norm Gap.” In it, he catalogued the day of a typical Internet user and then calculated the criminal liability.

The average American, he discovered, could be liable for nearly $5 billion per year if every act of copyright infringement were prosecuted. And that did not even include P2P file sharing.

The point was that the average individual did not know he was a lawbreaker and there was no real way to prosecute because no one was really responsible for enforcement.

Enter the Trans-Pacific Partnership.

RT has just reported on a significant strengthening of this criminalization in TPP, as follows:

TPP undergoes stealthy changes that expand penalties for copyright infringement …While the final text of the Trans-Pacific Partnership was released last November, a legal combing of the deal modified some language that resulted in substantially heavier penalties for copyright infringement.

Since the November finalization of the text, parties involved in the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), a free-trade agreement among twelve Pacific Rim nations, have had their lawyers engaged in a “legal scrub” of the document … Jeremy Malcolm at the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) caught a change made during the legal scrub in the intellectual property chapter of the agreement that has far-reaching implications for copyright infringement law.

The change turned the word “paragraph” into “subparagraph” and Malcolm believes it will force countries to criminalize copyright infringement even when copyright holders aren’t harmed (and presumably see the “infringement” as either neutral or positive).

Ultimately, the idea is to criminalize the very use of a URL – whether or not the URL-holder is comfortable with its use.

Copyright laws have a very long history, dating back to the days of the Gutenberg press, when it first became an issue.

At the time, the real intention of copyright was to slow the spread of printed information that was destabilizing Europe’s power structure.
It is evident that copyright laws and the impact they have on the permeation of ideas are significant. It can affect everything from social norms, to political structures, and most importantly technological innovations.

Historically, Germany’s enforcement of copyright was light, while England’s was heavy. Some have argued this led to an efflorescence of German science and literature.

And later this may have led to two world wars.

Inclusion of strengthened intellectual “property” regulations in TPP demonstrate that centuries later the elites’ desires are the same—to have the ability to control information and to assign value to it.

Absent the Internet, much that has been revealed in the past decade would not have come to light and this is especially true when it comes to how Western governments have been relating to the public.

The violent repression of information based on “ownership” of knowledge harbors a good deal of trouble going forward, just as it has in the past 500 years. The idea that the state will track, pursue and prosecute – criminally – those who “steal” information is logically questionable and culturally detrimental.

Conclusion: If TPP is passed in its current form – and then enforced – this could have a significant impact on the sharing of ideas and information through the Internet.

Posted in STAFF NEWS & ANALYSIS
  • dave jr

    Yep, the party goers, in the midst of a free lap dance, wouldn’t have a clue as what to legislate or prosecute without superior guidance, which ain’t from consent of “we the people” as designed.

  • The difficulty for present day systems of operation is the information worth stealing for tomorrows is not theirs to provide and trade.

    Future intellectual property for shared global broadbandcasting is the secret source which renders current exclusive executive order administrative systems and SCADA operations on the defensive retreat to a no mans land safe haven which protect one from nothing. ……. Registering Mail Special AIdDelivery

    And yes, DB, that is quite cryptic but please be assured well worth decoding and understanding to make sense of novel events now unfolding frenzies and feeding mainstream.? 🙂

    It is illogical to not imagine the future different from the past, and if one considers systems administrations being smarter than ever before, is the future bound to better and much more engaging …. and even terrifying whenever one realises what can easily be done, if one so wishes and is able and/or enabled.

    • dave jr

      Why not ‘decode’ it with plain language amfm? What is there to hide? And why do smart system administrators employ dumb a$$ enforcers if the new system is so wundeful? I don’t doubt it is. But the delivery is very suspect.

      • Why not ‘decode’ it with plain language amfm? What is there to hide? And why do smart system administrators employ dumb a$$ enforcers if the new system is so wundeful? I don’t doubt it is. But the delivery is very suspect. …. dave jr

        There is nothing hidden in the alien post, dave jr, which can be reduced to its essentials in the warning .. Launched Invisible and Incoming Explosive Munitions ….. if one is inclined to maintaining the status quo mayhem and madness rather than embracing …. well, nothing less than Novel Future CHAOS …. Clouds Hosting Advanced Operating Systems.

        And obviously the employment by any system administrators of dumb a$$ enforcers is proof positive of their being neither smart or SMARTR Enabling ….. and such in these changed and changing days with 0days to export and exploit, is a titanic vulnerability to be capitalised upon/milked and bilked to excess?

        What say Daily Bell Ringers to the facts and the fictions unveiling and revealing the Present and ITs Derivative Futures to be of Virtual Machine Intelligent Design?

        And whenever true, is that AIRemote Alien Command and Control.

  • Blank Reg

    The file sharers, who gather at places like torrent freak.com, are already showing us the way. Every time the “Cartoon monopoly” tries to shut down access, other methods pop up immediately. It’s a constant game of cat and mouse, and the mice are winning, using VPNs and other workarounds. The real threat, as stated in the article, is the “criminalization” of something that up until now has remained under civil law. Now state violence will be the first resort, not the last. People may actually die for the “crime” of sharing culture.

    We need to start asking our politicians and other authority figures, “Are you willing to kill for the sake of copyright?”, and conversely, “Are you prepared to die for it?”

  • Trico

    Block Passage of the TPP or the TPP will Block You!

  • 2bvictorius

    The real reason for governments of nations to use their power to criminalize abuse of copy rights is to gain control of the written word and even the spoken word. Governments have all of the resources needed to prosecute anyone who dares to challenge them on any issue regardless of circumstances. It gives the governments un fettered , unlimited power over the people.
    Only the greatest of fools would believe any government of any nation has as their motive, the desire to protect any copyright of any citizen or person of any national origin. The proof of their lies are many, but, one stands out and should be apparent to all but the blind, ” Governments are constantly seizing personal property by abusing the use of imminent domain laws of the United States and similar laws in other countries”, and there are increasing numbers of groups waging campaigns to strike down imminent domain laws throughout America.
    Never make the mistake of trusting or believing anything, any government declares as the truth.
    The mission of every free man should always be keep the devil in shackles and chains in a deep dark place far below the surface of the earth.

  • nailheadtom

    A written word is the graphic representation of the vibrations of the air, which are the physical products of the thought process. The idea that these can be reserved for the legal use and financial exploitation by an individual or group over all others is beyond preposterous.

  • OzzieThinker

    “Then enforced” are the key words here. The Anti-Spam act has done little to dissuade aggressive marketeers.
    Good luck to them lol.
    OT
    OT

  • Bruce C.

    I once knew a man who had a very “naturalistic” POV and was a great student of history. He was in his nineties and had read hundreds of history books. I really liked him because he was a real thinker. He would recall concepts – usually (and importantly for this post) not his own concepts but concepts posed by people throughout history, especially “ancient” history.

    One concept that he particularly liked, but also felt frustrated by, was that there really aren’t any “new” ideas. He would challenge me to tell him something that hadn’t been thought of before. Admittedly I was pretty young and “uneducated”, but according to him I never could.

    Obviously, scientific/technical knowledge didn’t count, but we both understood that that wasn’t “real” knowledge, it didn’t affect the “spiritual” realm of humanness, which is all that he considered to be relevant.

    So two things come to mind about this subject of “copyrightability.” One is that the claim that any non-scientific/technical concepts are ever “original” and therefore “copyrightable” in the first place, and the other is that any speech or writings that are made public become public, by definition.

    I can understand something written or spoken “privately” is still proprietary, but once it becomes “public” it becomes – well – public. Perhaps all that is required to subsume this issue of “copyrights” is to formally/legally declare internet content to be “public” and therefore un-copyrightable.

  • Silverado

    This is another BIG govt abomination and exercises & excesses of a police state. And I think we should instead just deal with the 0.01%, after all they seem to be the…kill-joys in all of this. Take care of them and our moral and financial troubles, as a society that craves freedom & liberty, would be over.

  • mutonic2db

    What will happen to one of my favourite websites, the DB, if URL’s are no longer allowed??
    Could one still google a certain sentence and find it that way, or would that be disallowed too??
    Johannes Gutenberg had the same problem, but in those days there was no worldwide “elite” to try and stop him, just the R.C. Church.
    And they lost.
    Lets hope that will happen again.

loading