ACTA Rejected By European Parliament 142
Grumbleduke writes "Today the European Parliament voted overwhelmingly to reject the controversial Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement. Despite attempts by the EPP Group to delay the vote until after the Courts have ruled on its legality, the Parliament voted against the Treaty by 478 to 39; apparently the biggest ever defeat the Commission has suffered. However, despite this apparent victory for the Internet, transparency and democracy, the Commission indicated that it will press ahead with the court reference, and if the Court doesn't reject ACTA as well, will consider bringing it back before the Parliament."
Thanks to the FFII, EDRI, la Quadrature (Score:2)
Congratulations to the FFII, EDRI and quadrature. You guys did awsome work.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Thanks to the FFII, EDRI, la Quadrature (Score:5, Funny)
Europe is once again reborn as a democracy, of the people, for the people.
That's our line, you damned socialist hippies.
Signed,
'Merika, Fuck Yeah!
Re: (Score:2)
Europe is once again reborn as a democracy, of the people, for the people.
That's our line, you damned socialist hippies.
Not anymore. You're in the process of repudiating it, you damned fascist toadie sheep.
Re: (Score:2)
Europe is once again reborn as a democracy, of the people, for the people.
Now all we have to deal with is the ESM [tumblr.com] and we are home free....
Sigh
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
It may well be that the vote has passed but may not make any difference
http://politics.slashdot.org/story/12/06/26/2116226/eu-commissioner-reveals-he-will-ignore-any-rejection-of-acta [slashdot.org]
Especially as there appears to be a plan B
http://www.dw.de/dw/article/0,,16070495,00.html [www.dw.de]
It's a good win at the moment, but the war isn't won.
Re: (Score:2)
Commission is powerless without parliament (Score:4, Informative)
It's rare to see the EU parliament - composing of over half a dozen groups, each of which is umbrella organization for dozens of parties from many countries - to be as united as they were now. They voted not only against the internet restricting laws but also against the kind of shady activity that occurred during ACTA preparations. Whatever the commission says now, I doubt they've got the balls to bring ACTA - or nearly identical equivalents with different name - back anytime soon... it would be such an act of disrespect towards the parliament that things could escalate far more than anyone is willing to risk "just for copyright".
I think we're safe at least until June of 2014 (next parliamentary elections in EU)... that is, of course, unless same provisions are brought back in a bill that also mention child pornography. EU legislators are pretty weak against the "think of the children" argument.
Re: (Score:3)
and I'm kind of proud to be an European. This was the first time were I recognized some "we, the people" feeling - the EU is mostly a bureaucratic umbrella and we have many democratic deficits.
But take a look at this [google.de], protests all over the continent, finally some pan-European atmosphere.
Neither top-to-bottom nor some organized spectacle (e.g. Euro2012 [football championship]) - great!
Re: (Score:3)
Yeah well done Britain. God my country sucks.
You know I went to Germany last year (I wasn't in the capital either, I was in Bremen, a small city in the North), I saw people wearing those Guy Fawkes masks meeting up in public peacefully protesting. They actually care. I've never seen it here, we simply worship consumerism.
Even Bulgaria got in on the action, we are at the bottom of the scale for engaging in political issues as important as this.
nice (Score:3)
unexpectedly, democracy works ! EP win against EC !
Re: (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:nice (Score:5, Informative)
The European Parliament has to give its consent. The vote was that it denied its consent.
The EC also invoked the European Court of Justice. The ECJ will simply say, we cannot rule on ACTA anymore because the process is terminated.
FFII for analysis [ffii.org].
Re: (Score:3)
We rewrote parts of it to satisfy their demands, and it went into effect in 2009.
Re: (Score:2)
It's the age-old problem with representative 'democracy' that the commission, or the power that be get an unlimited number of tries to pass a certain unpopular piece of legislation. They can re-package, re-brand it, attach it to another law, or if necessary water it
Re:nice (Score:5, Interesting)
The difference in this case is that ACTA isn't a piece of legislation written up by the EU that can be changed willy-nilly in order to secure the votes for passage.
ACTA is an international treaty that has been signed (but not ratified) by (most?) of the signatories' legislative bodies.
To change ACTA (to re-package, whatever) requires all the signatory nations to get back together & start re-negotiating the points of it. SImply put, the EU cannot alter ACTA for ratification independently.
Re: (Score:2)
Moreover, Ireland needs the EU, for financial reasons and whatnot. The EP does not need ACTA.
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed. The EC's man in charge of this treaty has stated he will continue to press-forward through the EU's "supreme court" to get ACTA enforced. So basically the Parliament vote don't mean shit..... you have a law-making body that can bypassed by the executive branch. (Sounds familiar.)
Re:nice (Score:5, Insightful)
No, it cannot be bypassed. What he can do is have it subject to judicial review and try to resubmit the ratification proposal. However, I would assume that parliament will not take kindly to this. Maybe they should move for a no confidence vote on Karel.
Re: (Score:2)
Unfortunately I think the EP is a little hindered in their power over individual commissioners, they can only fire the entire commission, not single individuals. Doing that requires requires grand standing and a game of chicken between the EC and the EP.
Re: (Score:1)
The EC (unelected and largely unaccountable)/quote> Come on, quit that old bullshit.
The European Commission is appointed and controlled by the governments of the member states, all of them democratically elected.
Re:nice (Score:5, Informative)
The EC (unelected and largely unaccountable)
Come on, quit that old bullshit.
The European Commission is appointed and controlled by the governments of the member states, all of them democratically elected.
Ah, indirectly. Most - if not all - EU countries use a parliamentary system, which means our governments are not directly elected, but elected by the parliaments which are directly elected. So you have voters > local parliament > local government > EC. So yeah, that's quite far from the voters. Compare to the EP: voters > EP. One step.
A lot of special interests are bound to be happening through those steps. However, the EC has far less power with the passing of Lisbon, so I wouldn't worry too much.
Re: (Score:2)
I recommend you to read up on party-list proportional representation voting systems. Because you can vote for individual candidates, but the party will also recieve a vote at the same time. Whenever a vote for a party list has elected on its candidate list, the votes from thereon pass onto the next one, and so on.
They are not indirectly elected, because their listing has to be made official prior to the election, and moreover, the list has to appear on every ballot, in order.
So even if it was indirect, it
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Come on, quit that old bullshit. The European Commission is appointed and controlled by the governments of the member states, all of them democratically elected.
Your point being? The EC is a group of political appointees, with a history of pushing agendas at odds with the wishes of the electorate and their democratically elected representatives.
Remember the software patents [ffii.org] battle?
Re: (Score:2)
The EC members, since 2009, consist of the head of states of every EU countries. Hardly "political appointees". In some countries in Europe the head of state is elected directly by the people.
Re:nice (Score:4, Insightful)
They'll just extradite everyone who violates it to the U.S. for prosecution.
Re: (Score:2)
The European Commission is not unelected nor unaccountable. Its president is first proposed by the European Council and then elected by the European Parliament. The European Council, in agreement with the president of the commission, then appoints the commissioners, which are then also subject to a vote of approval by the European Parliament. The European Parliament can also dismiss the European Commission (basically, a motion of no confidence), though not individual commissioners. In fact, an angry Europea
Re: (Score:2)
An incoming PM immediately faces a vote of confidence though, in the form of the budget vote. If they lose that then it all starts again with someone else being asked to try and form a government. The budget vote, in practice, demonstrates that the appointed prime minster has the backing of the majority of MPs.
Re: (Score:2)
Of course the EC is elected. It is an executive council made of all the head of states or government (whoever wield the actual top executive power in their respective state) and a few European representative like the president of the European Commission. All these people are elected according to the system of their own country of origin.
Of course it is accountable. Decisions taken in the EC are discussed in newspapers in Europe like any other political body of import. Boneheaded decision making result in no
Re: (Score:2)
No, maybe you are thinking of the council of ministers, which is a separate organ, but even then you would be wrong. The European Commission is made up of people _appointed_ by the executive branch of each member state. As such they do represent the traditional head of government. but not the head of state! Who gives a shit what the queen thinks?
No European organ is made up of the heads of state, the kings a
Re: (Score:3)
Unless they try and slip in onto page 735 of a bill about fisheries.
Nah, they'd never try anything as sneaky as that. Well, not again [theregister.co.uk].
Re: (Score:2)
I have the feeling that democracy doesn't work here. What does the legality of a rejected law matter? So why does the Court still have a say in this? And why, if ACTA is deemed legal, does the Parliament have to vote again? Is that normal procedure?
Re:nice (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:nice (Score:5, Informative)
This is true, except that the Commission cannot easily change ACTA as is as the treaty is signed. They could ask to have a protocol added which would require the approvals of all the original signing parties which include the US, Canada, the EU, the individual EU member states et.c. This in turn would mean that most governments need to acquire new negotiating mandates from their respective parliaments and so on. This is not a trivial operation.
Re:nice (Score:5, Insightful)
Nevertheless, the real issue is the unconvinient publicity of the ACTA, which could make all these "hidden" deals very hard to strike. Which is actually a real democracy at work.
Re: (Score:2)
Personally I fear that this was just a smokescreen and they put it up there just to fail and take up media space while they're busy passing the real treaty throu
Well done (Score:3, Insightful)
But we're only safe until the next bit of daft legislation.
Re: (Score:2)
Is there a government? If yes, then they can pass something you don't like and you need to be sure they don't if at all possible. If no, then you don't have to worry about it, but you have bigger issues that you do need to worry about then.
well good for them (Score:4, Funny)
Its nice to see some political critters with a shred of common sense still. Of course the MPAA/RIAA's of the world over there are thinking what the hell happened and if they didn't donate enough.
Re:well good for them (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
This is Europe. You can wine and dine the MEPs, to an extent, but you need to corrupt them in so many languages that you might find the task daunting... Also unlike the US, outright buying of politicians is frowned upon.
Because make no mistakes, unlimited campaign donations via "superpacs" is just that, buying politicos.
Re: (Score:3)
No doubt.
It should be noted, however, that politicians were bought and sold long before "superpacs" were even thought of.
Re: (Score:2)
True. SuperPACs are just the big box stores of corruption. But don't underestimate the impact of big box stores.
The commission is blatantly against democracy (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
They'll keep sending it until it's passed. It's what they get paid for.
Re:The commission is blatantly against democracy (Score:5, Insightful)
Won't work. If there's one thing that the EU Parliament have shown is that when people try and bypass their authority they're willing to turn up in huge numbers to vote it down on principle.
Re: (Score:1)
It would have been very funny seeing this proposal being rejected continuously unless you consider that each iteration of the process costs task payers money.
Why are we continuously footing that bill if it has been shown that the treaty has been overwhelmingly rejected?
"SOUP! The goat fetched SOUP!!"
"SOUP?!?11one This makes no sense!"
Re: (Score:1)
task payers = tax payers.... sigh... I should stop reading /. and get back to JIRA.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
You are correct. All actions now should be direct at EC member responsible for Trade Karel De Gucht asking him why after so many rejections of ACTA he is still wasting tax payer money by not retracting his ACTA submission from the EU court.
Re: (Score:1)
Six hundred no's and a yes, is a yes (Score:5, Funny)
ACTA is like a sleezy guy trying to pick you up in a bar.
You can tell him no six hundred times and he'll keep coming back, because all it takes is one yes and he's fucked you.
Re:Six hundred no's and a yes, is a yes (Score:5, Insightful)
And he will keep rephrasing the question until you say Yes by accident.
Re: (Score:2)
And by consequence the voters that elected them.
Re: (Score:1)
Yes... Yes I do...
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Six hundred no's and a yes, is a yes (Score:5, Funny)
Europe needs to go back to killing the messenger. If they send the guy carrying the next version of ACTA back in a coffin, it might get the point across.
Re: (Score:2)
rich guys are running the world.
and rich guys LOVE their lives. and to live.
hmmm, this may just work.
Re: (Score:2)
Just send the head back in a flat rate postal box. Save on postage. coffin &ct.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, they said if it fits it ships! I don't see the problem here.
Re: (Score:2)
Don't celebrate just yet (Score:1)
This is the European July 4th... (Score:4, Insightful)
Higgs' Boson discovered by LHC before Tevatron, and ACTA (already implemented in the USA) finally rejected by the European Parliament. Europe wins both in science and democracy. Very sad july 4th for the USA.
Dear hollywood cocaineaholics/drunk singers/corrupt american politicians/etc..., f*uck you!
Re: (Score:1, Funny)
Hey - don't take it too hard..
You still have those beautiful software patents. ... if you are a lawyer that is).
Now that's something we don't have here in Europe.
It must be a lot of fun to see all those cases increase (well
Re:This is the European July 4th... (Score:4, Funny)
Don't forget the Apple design patents!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Why is the European Parliament doing business today? Don't they know it's the Fourth?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
To be slightly pedantic, machines don't make discoveries. That, or the Higgs was discovered months ago.
Re: (Score:2)
Very sad july 4th for the USA
Not really, it might just encourage the Americans to do better.
They out-Sovieted the Soviets, perhaps it's time they try to out-Europe the Europeans instead.
Act of war.... (Score:1)
Just wait for Romney to get elected, Europe will find out what it's like to not do what they are told.
Retroactively adopt ACTA or face War! we have several ships ready with nuclear armed cruise missles ready to strike every capitol and 3 largest cities in all of europe if you dont to what you are told to do.
dissent must be stopped with a swift and severe blow to reinforce the fear to the others.
We have always been at war with Eurasia.
The emperor commands us to fight against the heretics.
Pick any insane w
Re: (Score:2)
Not only did they reject it... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
That made my day :)
Re: (Score:2)
Specifically, these are the MEPs from The Greens-European Free Alliance [wikipedia.org] group (you can see its logo on the lower right of the signs).
It's worth noting that the two MEPs of the Swedish Pirate Party belong to this group, which is unsurprizing given the Greens have been sharing their concerns for a long time.
Vote influenced by Pirate Party? (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The vote was near anonymous. More than 90% against. That's not just populism, the pirate parties don't make any serious inroads.
Greece is a bad example: that country is in shatters, and people will vote for whoever is not part of the old leadership. The austerity there hurts too, of course, many people don't like it of course, but it seems the overall opinion of the Greek people is that their country should stay in the Eurozone. That's at least what they're currently heading for.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
The vote was near anonymous. More than 90% against.
I don't think that word means what you think it means.
- Unanimous Coward
Re: (Score:3)
Well, if you look at the picture here http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/news/9346957/MEPs-reject-ACTA-piracy-treaty.html [telegraph.co.uk] he might have meant what he said...
But no, I don't think the recent electoral successes have done that much to influence. However, the Swedish Pirate MEP's, Christian Engström and Amelia Andersdotter, have most certainly done a lot of work in the European Parliament. And I would wager that a lot of pirate party activists have been encouraged enough to actually mail various MEP's
Re: (Score:2)
I stand corrected :-)
Re: (Score:3)
The Pirate Party is very influential. Take a look for instance at this "Creation and Copyright in the Digital Era" [greens-efa.eu] position paper, in particular paragraph 26. The Greens/EFA is the fourth-largest political group in the European Parliament and officially supports reducing copyright to 20 years after publication. There's even more in that paper.
Guess what your MAME collection could look like with a copyright limited to 20 years? Or software for your 8-bit home computer emulator you used way back when? As well
Not law in the USA either (Score:5, Informative)
The US constitution guarantees a fair+speedy trial (Score:3)
Now look at Guantanamo.
Re: (Score:2)
It seems that most of the prisoners there are not citizens and have no reasonable expectation that we'll gra
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The sleazebags in the white house seem to claim that it's a 'trade agreement' that doesn't change law so it needs no ratification. And they try to claim the same in Europe, altho they have not gotten around the need for ratification.
Of course, that's ignoring the point that signing even an agreement that doesn't change current law will still prevent a scaling back of IP law and thus bind congress and senate.
This corruption seems prevalent throughout various government arms in many countries. 'Special' IP en
Re: (Score:2)
The Constitution is but a piece of worthless paper.
That should have been evident since what 10-15 years ago ?
1861. [wikipedia.org]
What will ACTA proponents say? (Score:3)
People didn't understand? They were the victims of a misinformation campaign? LOL.
Wonder how many humiliations it'll take to demoralize and scare copyright extremists enough that they'll never try the likes of ACTA again? Drum Karel De Gucht out. Force Theresa May to reconsider and not extradite O'Dwyer. Kick out the officials who are helping with the harassment of the Pirate Bay.
Then the extremists can spend the rest of their lives sulking in their mansions like deposed royalty, since they seem unable to face reality.
Re: (Score:2)
No amount will be enough. We're going to have to roast one or more of them on a spit to get the point across.
Legal or not, who cares? (Score:2)
Message to Old Media Model Companies: (Score:2)
Just frickin' die already! And stop trying to take the rest of the world with you down your death-spiral.
The world owes you NOTHING.
return (Score:2)
Yes, one commissioner has said that he's going to bring it back again and again.
The summary misses something important, though: That EU MEPs have made it very clear what they think of that strategy. Shooting yourself in the foot is a really attractive option compared to the equivalent of telling the judge up front that you're going to appeal his ruling anyways - when he knows that he will also preside over the appeal case.
I wonder, who voted PRO-ACTA ?! (Score:2)
So, we can vote against those ;)
Re: (Score:3)
You seem to misunderstand how 'democracy' works in Europe. In the EU, you get a vote, and if you vote the wrong way they keep forcing you to vote again until you get it right.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
He must be Russian. ~
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
i guess the european politics doesn't need to raise money for their campaigns for office, so they don't have to go after the money from special interests.
That's why having a public finance law for political parties is so important not only at the european level but also at the local level. And also why many countries have a tax on tv that serves to finance public broadcasters. These simple concepts, are very important for a democratic society that is not yet subverted totally by private interests is anathema it seems to american citizens.