Global treaty could throw file-sharers off Internet after ‘three strikes’

By Daniel Tencer
Wednesday, November 4th, 2009 -- 6:42 pm
Share on Facebook Stumble This!

eyespyonyourinternet Global treaty could throw file sharers off Internet after three strikesFile-sharers could be jailed under proposed ACTA provisions

Leaked details of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement being negotiated in secret by most of the world's largest economies suggest Internet file-sharers could be blocked from accessing the Internet if they are repeatedly accused of sharing copyrighted material, say media and digital-rights watchdogs.

And the worst-case scenario could see popular Web sites like YouTube and Flickr shut down because of a provision in the treaty that would force them to monitor everything uploaded to the site for copyright violations.

Internet law professor Michael Geist published details of "leaked" portions of the discussions on ACTA on his blog Tuesday, as a new round of ACTA negotiations began in Seoul, South Korea. The US, along with all the countries of the European Union as well as Japan, Canada, Australia and a handful of other countries, are involved in the negotiations.

"The provisions would pave the way for a globalized three-strikes and you're out system," Geist blogged Wednesday, referring to a proposal from copyright holders to have Internet service providers cut off service to anyone accused at least three times of illegally sharing copyrighted material.

Story continues below...

"This means that your entire family could be denied [access] to the Internet -- and hence to civic participation, health information, education, communications, and their means of earning a living -- if one member is accused of copyright infringement, without access to a trial or counsel," blogged tech writer and digital-rights supporter Cory Doctorow.

Doctorow also noted that another provision being proposed for the treaty would mean "that ISPs have to proactively police copyright on user-contributed material. This means that it will be impossible to run a service like Flickr or YouTube or Blogger, since hiring enough lawyers to ensure that the mountain of material uploaded every second isn't infringing will exceed any hope of profitability."

And, as Geist noted in a follow-up article on Wednesday, the proposed treaty could end up seeing file-sharers jailed for sharing copyrighted material, even if they had no financial gain from the transaction.

Geist wrote that the treaty, as currently proposed, would "extend criminal enforcement to both (1) cases of a commercial nature; and (2) cases involving significant willful copyright and trademark infringement even where there is no direct or indirect motivation of financial gain. In other words, non-commercial infringement could lead to criminal penalties."

"The US government appears to be pushing for Three Strikes to be part of the new global IP enforcement regime which ACTA is intended to create -– despite the fact that it has been categorically rejected by the European Parliament and by national policymakers in several ACTA negotiating countries, and has never been proposed by US legislators," writes Gwen Hinze at the Electronic Frontier Foundation.

ACTA negotiations were being held entirely in secret until this past May, when the Wikileaks Web site released a 2007 draft proposal.

The Obama administration has resisted attempts to make the negotiations public, though it did make an exemption for a long list of senior executives at major corporations.

In June, the administration announced it would continue the ACTA negotiations started under the previous administration.

Share this article:
  • Print this article!
  • E-mail this story to a friend!
  • Digg
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter
  • Facebook

Story comments are below...
  • thunderfuck
    they the gov want to control your every move look up the treaty obama will sign in dec.look at this

    http://www.youronlineinsurance.com/health-insur...

    i smell a war coming the biggest this world has ever seen...mark my words nay sayers...don't say you was'nt warned..
  • redacted
    Who represents the US in these negotiations? Who appointed them? Is this an Obama pick/position?

    If so.....That's IT for my support. Motherfuckers. The internet....The ONE THING we have that is even remotely free...And their gonna sell it out. They're going to ruin it all, and it will never, ever be what it was/could have become. Is anyone EVER going to represent the fucking people?? Is EVERYTHING ALWAYS about the interests of corporations? Always?? Everytime??? Fuck all of them....Including their paid representatives, the Dems and Repukes. Just fucking shameful.
  • Wildcat
    Yet spammers will continue to enjoy what amounts to a free pass...
  • hoosierdaddy
    So much for the free advertising the owners of said copyrighted material get.
    After seeing a video on YouTube of Journey's new singer, Arnel Pineda, I went out and plunked down over $600 for four tickets, and I did it again this year. Had it not been for that video, I likely would not have had an opportunity to check him out and spent the money on the first year's tour.
    I've seen a number of other videos that have led me to seek out further information and eventually purchase products by those copyright holders.
    I honestly don't understand what their problem is as long as it isn't a complete work and no one is making any money on it. The majority of people that put clips up are fans that want others to jump on board the fanwagon.
    Such greedy idiots these people are.
  • thunderfuck
    the problem is they "gov" want total control of your life they want to watch your every move.beware a war is in the mist,the biggest one the world has ever seen...mark my words all you nay sayers....
  • rawstorysuspect
    so lets see...
    never been proposed by legislators... resisting attempts to make negotiations public...
    MERE ACCUSATIONS LEAD TO CONSEQUENCES!?!
    this is so bogus.
    clearly the public doesn't want this. clearly it is another attempt by the plutocracy to pass laws against the public's will in favor of corporations.

    will it pass?
  • CaptBebops
    We content producers should flood the Internet with Copy Left material and drive Hollywood out of business. That'll teach them.
  • Chris From Maine
    1. this would be completely unconstitutional and wouldnt stand up in any court.

    2. if they did this, 75%+ of Americans would be cut off from the Internet, and trust me, no American politician would stand for that kind of uprising. And there would be an uprising.

    3. how are they gonna catch people? what is the enforcement and the mechanism thereof?

    This is bad news, no doubt, but this is one of the times I'm glad to be an American instead of one of these other countries that will fall under this totalitarian BS.
  • OldAtlantic
    What they need are rules to cover the worst offenders with fines that are constant per infraction. The ones really bad like rapidshare would then be hit with those fines over and over. Book file sharing is substantially worse than clips on Youtube.

    Filesharers that are really trying to share copyright material like books are obvious. The big players can afford to total up the fines and push it on them. The cost of enforcing it is part of the equilibrium. A costly enforcement rule results in only the really bad ones being targeted.
  • This is a joke and it is completely unenforceable...
  • The teabaggers will be protesting this! Right?

    Don't worry, there will be another 9/11 inside job, and they'll railroad it through to stop "the terrorists".
  • dennycrane
    It's a game. The old boys that home brewed the first satellite antennas/receivers Cooper/Howard told us that someday someone like Time/Warner would "own" communications and entertainment. Include the internet, which back then was not hardly known to us. It is still possible to "watch" free tv, but unless you are using tor or something to "hide" your isp, "someone" has a "menu" of everything coming into/out of your computer. They are the ones that "call" something copyrighted. If you "run" Micro$loth Windoze, you know that even though you "bought" it you can only use it, you don't own it. If the Goodwill store sells a used pc with windoze on the harddrive, they are busted.

    You've seen the news where a single mom got sued by the music nazis for having downloaded a few mp3's and had to cough up $250,00 per song. Talking about filing bankruptcy for medical expenses, how about for a few songs. And, by the way, bankruptcy frowns on criminal activity. Just think, if a "political" power is in command on this, they could go after a "certain" group and hurt them so they can't interact or/and find them so much they are forever in "debtors" prison. These bastards play hardball. Watch your downloads.
  • robertnestamar
    rediculous
  • thefreedomship
    Shit.
  • isn't there a treaty regarding torture, too? oh, well, laws only apply to the punishable. that's you and me, sparky ... gwb was in tokyo yesterday watching the jpn series ... former primester koizumi and former baseball slugger/mngr sadaharu oh sitting up there in the vip box ... angered me ... oh-san didn't look too thrilled to be there [probably wanted to enjoy the game with a beer - and not have to deal with a faked tex-glish accent].
  • pongagt
    I guess they are looking for more computer literate workers for their private prison workforce. It will create debtors prison when those convicted don't have money to pay the imposed fines or simply won't pay them. It will also keep those convicted from accessing real information and not just corporate controlled "news".
  • dennycrane
    One percent of the population, just in the US, is already in jail. Take it "globally," you got some real numbers.
  • davidrvelasquez
    Internet cyber-fascism pure and simple.

    And yet the music industry gets to rip off artists and their works without consequence... fucking assholes!
  • jwkessler
    A recent report I saw said that file sharers are also the people who actually buy the most music. So what is the benefit of blocking your best customers from accessing your products? Plus people pay for other services on the web. Sirius/XM streaming service is but one example. So this can hurt other businesses as well.

    No winners that I can see but lots of losers. Brilliant idea!
  • josephwiess
    Closing off an entire family for the crimes of one is communistic, and against the Freedom's we enjoy. The internet is the last bastion of free thought and closing off that freedom is what dictator's do. Think about China and Venezuela, where they block off sites about Freedom and news services, and you'll understand what I'm talking about.
    With the creation of three NSA data centers, the US government is taking steps that they say can be used to shut off the internet, in case of riots, national disasters, etc, and would only allow government sites to remain online.

    Every day, this government seems to be more and more remote from what we stand for, and unless we do something about it, we'll lose all our freedoms.
blog comments powered by Disqus