Backlash Builds Against US Copyright Blacklist 292
An anonymous reader writes "The release last week of the US copyright blacklist is beginning to generate a backlash in countries around the world. Reports from Canada, Europe, and Asia all note that the US claims are very suspect and that the report is little more than an attempt to bully dozens of countries into following the US DMCA model."
Re:SURPRISE!! (Score:5, Interesting)
Just once I'd like to see the European Union Parliament issue a joint resolution to the White House:
"Fuck off."
Just to see what would happen.
Wait for it (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Does the US Get It Yet? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:lies lies (Score:5, Interesting)
The US Dollar is backed by the world's largest prison system, the IRS, and nuclear weapons.
Think about it before laughing.
Re:Wait for it (Score:4, Interesting)
Not going to happen. What might happen instead is the usual mix of embargoes, paper resolutions, backroom deals and "diplomacy", but outright war? You're kidding yourself.
Pretty much the only times a modern nation will go to war is when it thinks it can win. Meaning against an opponent who hasn't the economic or military wherewithal to stand up and make the invader hurt. Hell, even in Iraq, the actual hurt being done to the US forces is being done by civilian insurgents, not an actual military.
Name me one ground war since WWII that was fought between two developed nations that were anywhere near on equal footing. You can't. Even stuff like the Falklands war hardly qualifies as a "ground war", while 'Nam and Korea were the US against tiny nations that had bigger powers backing them by proxy. Do you really think that will change? Or that copyright will be the motive if it does?
All the countries that the US opposes on the copyright issue are either first world nations or military powers in their own right. The little backwaters that it could actually clobber haven't the economic or political capital to make a copyright war worthwhile for the corporations that would promote such a measure. You really think the US is prepared for a ground war with Russia? How about Sweden? China? Canada? Please.
Re:Hm, wonder why (Score:5, Interesting)
There is a fine balance imo. China is like Geocities. There is a lot of shit coming out China for every geniune innovation.
The same could be said for any market, thats why we have reviews, if every game was as good as *insert favorite game here, as to not start a flamewar* then there wouldn't be a need for game reviews. Same thing for books, etc.
The nice thing about China though is, everything is cheap and unhampered by corporations. For example, if they manage to get Bluetooth in there, they aren't going to disable tethering, etc. like what the phone monopolies in the USA make vendors do. You similarly are going to get cheap, unlocked phones. Most people's phones (especially 20-somes and teenagers) don't have a long life. For example, a phone accidentally dropped in a cup of coffee is probably going to be dead no matter if it was a top of the line phone from Nokia or Samsung or if it was a generic Chinese crap phone. So quality really doesn't matter, and the cloned phones have enough features that people need in a dumbphone (SMS, calls, sometimes a touchscreen or full keyboard, camera, etc) while not costing $300 unlocked.
While we do need the freedom to improve upon things we also need protection from companies making shoddy knock-offs
Sure, but that already happens in America, if we simply enforce trademark and weak copyright you don't get deceived that the cheap phone you bought was an iPhone, but there will be cheap iPhone-like phones available. Everyone wins. (And if you don't think that the iPhone is already cloned, it already is by most cell phone vendors here in the USA, the difference is you pay $400 for the rip off rather then $100)
Re:Hm, wonder why (Score:5, Interesting)
Why do we see so many (innovative and clone) products from China? Because they don't have the stupidities of US patent and copyright laws.
It's interesting to note that we did the exact same thing in the 1800s with any and all technology that we could manage to get our hands on during our industrial revolution phase.
Re:Hm, wonder why (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:Hm, wonder why (Score:5, Interesting)
China has a system of blatantly stealing known technology too (see the Redberry, and Chery motors). They have no rules regarding foreign products, and in fact are encouraged to rip off what happens overseas by the govt. So I don't think that using China as an example of "innovation" is appropriate.
Simple rules to allow artists and creators to make a living off of being artists aren't bad things. I'm perfectly fine with a musician being ticked that someone's jacking their music, writings, or whatever.
In fact, if the RIAA and MPAA actually operated within those confines, I'm sure we'd have nowhere near the issue that we have now. The problem I have with the copyright lobby is that they've become a lobby. They don't value add, and they employ methods of enforcement that should be illegal. If they understood that their business model needs changing, and were willing to work *with* the markets instead of *against* the people, I'd see them as quite good and helpful.
Sadly, their impression of embracing technology involves wiretapping, and not using the wire to sell and distribute.
Now, onto your iPhone example - I think that you should concentrate elsewhere. In Japan, the iPhone is nothing special. They have excellent cutting edge phones, but from what I've gathered they do tend to be a little less reliable software wise. The features they have make the iPhone rather pedestrian (http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2009/02/why-the-iphone/). In the case of the US, we do have a massive phone market, with a lot of competition, and decent product lines. It's not amazing by any stretch, but we have very solid phones, and they're engineered for reliability since that seems to be more important to the market here. Make no mistake, there's a lot of choice in the US.
Re:SURPRISE!! (Score:3, Interesting)
You seem to live in a very different America than I do. Everyone I can see here in the US wants jack and shit to do with the personal responsibility that comes with not being socialist. All the current lawsuits because the slide wasn't labeled as "slippery" and other such bullshit, people wanting to be on unemployment rather than actually working, welfare providing a wonderful work-free existence... we already ARE socialists. You must have blinked.
Re:Blacklist? (Score:3, Interesting)
By the way, it mentions that North Korea was taken off the bad-boy list. Does anyone really think North Korea instituted a DMCA-like law?
Do you really think Korea is a worse copyright violator than Canada? As far as Canada is concerned, this is obviously a pressure tacit to get them to write their own DMCA. Hell, even their own biased numbers show that we have the LOWEST piracy rate of anyone on the list [michaelgeist.ca], and yet we've been put in a category with the worst violators, all of which have, according to THEM, more than twice our piracy rate.
Re:SURPRISE!! (Score:1, Interesting)
And while we're at it, I'd like Canada to issue the same statement to the EU for their attempt to deprive our indigenous people of their traditional seal hunt and what little economy they have.
Seriously, EU, fuck you.
Re:lies lies (Score:5, Interesting)
Suddenly, Canada's 50% of gdp looks positively cheery.
At rates we were going before the child-like and ignorant Conservatives decided to follow the Americans into the pit of despair and debt, it was going to take only 50 years to pay off the debt at current rates(before accounting for inflation).
Re:lies lies (Score:5, Interesting)
I could create a budget to pay-off the United States debt in 5 maybe 10 years time. The only problem is that my budget would involve moving SSI from an "everyone's eligible" system to a "only poor are eligible" system, and none of the voters would want to hear that. Plus my budget would cut military spending to near-zero, and the military-industrial complex doesn't want that either.
I'd likely end-up assassinated. But if the U.S. ever wants to get out of debt, there is no other way except to cut spending. The alternative, hyperinflation of the dollar until you need 10,000 dollars to buy a loaf of bread, is too horrible to contemplate. The only good solution is to sacrifice.
Oh well.
For once I'm glad the U.S. is in 15th place. Normally when we fall behind nations like Norway or Sweden on the internet speeds, I think that's bad, but in this case I'm glad we carry less debt than they do. (By the way, I thought the European Union forbids deficit spending of its member states?)
Re:lies lies (Score:5, Interesting)
Nope he doesn't, but he knew that he appointed 3 of RIAA's top lawyers to the executive branch. And now we're seeing the consequences of that, and yes Obama is responsible.
You know, one thing I've noticed about legal professionals is that they tend to be absolutely loyal to the highest bidder. Which means that when they switch employers, they switch loyalties. And they don't report to Hollywood any more.
I'm not saying they'll necessarily change their attitudes towards the MAFIAA but that it's no longer personally necessary to them to push their old agenda. They report to the chief executive now. My point? Where they used to work may be a flawed predictor for what they're going to do. To turn a phrase on its head, in this case "causation isn't correlation" and to think otherwise would likely impinge upon ad hominem.
To be charitable, we need to give them a chance to repent their misspent youth. And if they don't, I suggest we stone them in a cobblestoned street.
Re:Does the US Get It Yet? (Score:4, Interesting)
Which is nothing compared to the war crimes the Japanese themselves managed to commit.
War crimes committed by the Japanese armed forces do not justify war crimes committed by the US. It's a very bad road to travel. These sorts of justifications for war crimes suddenly look far less attractive when the situation is reversed. Many of the military top brass considered the bombings to be unnecessary and also a heinous act.
e.g.
During his recitation of the relevant facts, I had been conscious of a feeling of depression and so I voiced to him my grave misgivings, first on the basis of my belief that Japan was already defeated and that dropping the bomb was completely unnecessary, and secondly because I thought that our country should avoid shocking world opinion by the use of a weapon whose employment was, I thought, no longer mandatory as a measure to save American lives. It was my belief that Japan was, at that very moment, seeking some way to surrender with a minimum loss of 'face'. The Secretary was deeply perturbed by my attitude...
- Dwight Eisenhower, Mandate For Change, pg. 380
"...the Japanese were ready to surrender and it wasn't necessary to hit them with that awful thing."
- Ike on Ike, Newsweek, 11/11/63
It is my opinion that the use of this barbarous weapon at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender because of the effective sea blockade and the successful bombing with conventional weapons.
"The lethal possibilities of atomic warfare in the future are frightening. My own feeling was that in being the first to use it, we had adopted an ethical standard common to the barbarians of the Dark Ages. I was not taught to make war in that fashion, and wars cannot be won by destroying women and children.
- Admiral William Leahy, I Was There, pg. 441.
The atomic weapons used on Japan saved millions and millions of lives, and prevented even greater Japanese atrocities. Indeed, we still have purple hearts left over today from the supply ordered before the invasion of Japan, as the estimated casualties approached 1 million Americans, and nearly all the Japanese.
With Russia entering the war against Japan, they were already going to surrender pretty soon and the US knew it. The US military casualty estimates were originally nowhere near the 1 million level. The figures were being inflated in an attempt to justify the atomic bombings. However, even if the casualty estimates were right, it still does not justify the bombings. If it's ok for the US to murder several hundred thousand civilians in order to keep its own military casualties down, then it's also ok for anyone else. Would you accept Russia nuking Georgian cities in a future conflict in order to save the lives of Russian soldiers? If an enemy used similar tactics in order to cut down its military casualties, there would be virtually no-one arguing that it was justified (other than in the enemy country).
Re:lies lies (Score:4, Interesting)
Surely he has done something about those specific issues. The wrong thing maybe, but undeniably (and regrettably) something.
Re:Copyright issue is a scam (Score:4, Interesting)
Yep. I teach physics at a community college. The school seems all too ready to accept propaganda from the publishers. At one of our yearly convocation breakfasts, they passed out a little booklet about copyright to all the faculty. The booklet was written by a publishing industry association, and you'd better believe that the words "fair use" occurred absolutely nowhere inside.
Most college professors don't know how many high-quality free books there are to choose from -- see my sig. I use free books in all my courses. I just had an interesting talk with an econ professor at my school who has just adopted a free book put out by flatworldknowledge.com.
One thing I see in the halls of the faculty offices that's really scary is that the textbook reps are pushing electronic books like crazy -- but these books are apparently distributed with DRM, on a rental basis, so that as soon as the student stops paying, the book stops working.
Re:lies lies (Score:3, Interesting)
In fact interference in the inner affairs of foreign nations is inadmissable.
Re:SURPRISE!! (Score:3, Interesting)
I've fought these wars the best I can since we invaded Iraq...but protest doesn't work when your government doesn't listen and the people are too comfortable.
Really. What protests did you attend and/or organize? Which congressmen did you contact? What campaigns did you work for? What organizations related to the issues important to you were you involved with? What offices did you run for?
By "I've fought these wars the best I can" do you mean "I've complained about it to people I've met"? Or have you actually done something?
Biggest monopolist of them all (Score:3, Interesting)
Isn't it funny that the United States government has gone after so many corporations, accusing them of abusing positions of dominance in markets to create monopolies, when in fact that same government - and Americans collectively as a nation - have been guilty of the exact same monopolistic behaviors, perpetrated against the rest of the world? The United States has been abusing its economic position to "export" its economic values and system for many decades. In fact, that exportation is more coercive and extortionate than it is consensual: "you style your economy and trade laws after our own, to protect OUR interests and desire to profit from YOUR citizens, or we won't do business with you".
Oh, and THEN there was the Iraq War(s).
It's about time the United States Government itself was indicted on anti-trust charges. It has violated all the "trust" the American people have ever placed in it. Actions speak louder than words: this is an industrialist-dominated capitalist economy first and a democracy a distant second. Those decades of coercion, the Iraq War, and now this unsurprising revelation about yet more economic browbeating. So-called intellectual property law is one of the key aspects of that monopolistic behavior.
Forget about impeaching just Bush and Cheney... we need to impeach the entire American government, retroactively back to at least the early 1900s, and the entire American people for quietly condoning this and turning a blind eye. This is an entire nation guilty of monopolistic behavior, and using both the might of our economy AND our military to enable it.
Re:Does the US Get It Yet? (Score:3, Interesting)
This claim has been made before, but without proof of intent. An equally (or more) plausible reason is that the estimates kept going up as we got intel back from Japan about how they were preparing their *entire* population to "fight to the death". Nor was this without its own supporting evidence, try reading about what US troops encountered during the Okinawa campaign, which had a large component of native Japanese civilians. The suicidal fanaticism exhibited by the Japanese only escalated during '44-'45, rather than decrease, clearly not an indication of a people ready to surrender, and in fact it looked increasingly to the US, as evidence that perhaps an invasion of their homeland would in fact be horrifically bloody for both sides.
I'd like to expand on this a bit. There were many different ways estimates were produced. The battle of Okinawa caused 72,000 casualties in 82 days, excluding indirect deaths from wounds that occurred after the battle. The casualty rate was 407 for every 10 square miles. Assuming the casualty rate was only 5% as high on the mainland, US casualties would have numbered 297,000.
The Secretary of War estimated that 1.7-4 million American casualties, and 5-10 million Japanese fatalities would occur if there was a land invasion. This estimate took into account the expected large scale civilian involvement.
One mobilized high school girl, Yukiko Kasai, found herself issued an awl and told, "Even killing one American soldier will do. ... You must aim for the abdomen."
The Japanese mobilized all healthy men aged 15-60, and women 17-40, and armed them with whatever was available, including longbows, muzzle-loading muskets, and bamboo spears. The battle was, at the very least, going to be hard fought. Over 28 Million Japanese had been mobilized in this way, and were considered combat capable, before the first atomic bomb dropped.
In retrospect, our estimates may have been low. In August, 1945 we estimated only 9 divisions numbering 545,000 defenders at KyÅshÅ, and largely hadn't accounted for the Citizens Fighting Corps described above.
The intelligence revelations about Japanese preparations on Kyushu emerging in mid-July transmitted powerful shock waves both in the Pacific and in Washington. On 29 July, [MacArthur's intelligence chief, Major General Charles A.] Willoughby ... noted first that the April estimate allowed for the Japanese capability to deploy six divisions on Kyushu, with the potential to deploy ten. "These [six] divisions have since made their appearance, as predicted," he observed, "and the end is not in sight." If not checked, this threatened "to grow to [the] point where we attack on a ratio of one (1) to one (1) which is not the recipe for victory."
In actuality, by August 1945 the Japanese had 14 divisions and three tank brigades totaling 900,000 men, as well as 40% of the ammunition in all of Japan stationed at Kyushu. In comparison, Normandy was defended by 4 German divisions, with no civilian defense forces. The Germans also didn't know where the Allies would land. Operation Downfall would have been the largest, bloodiest campaign in history, and would have quite possibly lead to the complete and utter destruction of Japan.