This will fundamentally change the internet. Governments and Corporations should not have access to these ‘secret’ negotiations when the public is not being informed. This treaty is setup to protect the income of shareholders for multinationals and is not in the public interest.

People are being forced to sign non-disclosure agreements and people on twitter are being ejected from the meetings about this treaty - and these are only the ‘public’ meetings - what is going on behind closed doors?
http://www.boingboing.net/2010/01/22/activist-ejected-fro.html

Time for much more transparency in decision making that affects citizens, and good freedoms of speech and freedom from the use of libel law to close down dissent.

Agree with comment that robust positive senesible analysis is needed, and this is too important to be left as a sideshow.

MPM, you are a disgrace and I am ashamed to be on the same side of politics as you.

Fail

http://www.aph.gov.au/library/Pubs/RN/2001-02/02rn42.htm

Also these articles:

http://libertus.net/censor/fspeechlaw.html
http://www.comslaw.org.au/LeftMenu/FreeSpeechDefamation/tabid/59/Default.aspx

You referred to something that doesn’t exist. Why did you feel the need to do that?

“… If you choose to disagree, I can’t stop you…”

Great. You won’t make it as a journalist peddling falsehoods.

But if you choose to disagree, I can’t stop you.

You don’t need to be a conspiracy theorist to see that governments refusing the disclose details of the treaty suggests something underhand is at work.

He also noted that informed reaction is hampered by (1) secrecy of the provisions (as Angus Kidman reports), and (2) mainstream media likely having a vested interest in ACTA’s passage. It is rumoured that the provisions include that anti-piracy enforcement may be moved to government (rather than the ‘wronged’ company) so that it can be treated as a criminal rather than civil matter (I’m out of my depth on such matters so may misunderstand this). This would be a big change in intellectual property mechanisms and significantly increase (further) big business influence on government.

There is also concern that ACTA may threaten the existence of Free/Libre and Open Source software by attacking its use of copyright law in a manner contrary to traditional use in imposing many restrictions, by tackling the ‘copyleft’ mandate of few if any restrictions. But, as noted, the provisions of ACTA are a closely held secret by an Obama Administration committed to public openness, although I see in the above arstechnica weblink that it has evidently been shared with 40 other countries. Given Angus’ reference to the US/Australia Free Trade Agreement, it would been useful to hear whether this is likely another case of US corporate interests determining Australian domestic laws.

Here’s a bit more, via bOINGbOING on a draft leaked late last year: http://boingboing.net/2009/11/03/secret-copyright-tre.html
and the shut-out of the third world and civil society: http://www.boingboing.net/2009/04/14/new-acta-copyright-t.html

That does sound like something to be concerned about. It’s true it hasn’t received mainstream coverage.

Having spent this morning chasing up some IP issues with generic chemicals, and having been involved with the US free trade agreement, we need a good active open discussion on IP and copyright. We were duded in some areas and have yet to realise it. We nearly lost significant parts of the pharmaceutical benefit scheme again through excessive protection of IP.

Time to demand that non Australian corporations be denied certain privileges. ie access to directly lobby governments, and that their Australian representees need to submit publicly available reports on subject, time and any inducements. How do you classify escorts?

Closely examine the impact on Haiti of US cooperation’s. The rolling of the Aristide government was in part due to the workers of a US cooperation demanding and getting better wages, then having that reversed after the intervention. Other incidents bring to mind the consequences of action to support US corporations – the United Fruit Company in Central America. Power to the geeks.

Maybe you could point to us the relevant passage in the Australian Constitution that confers upon its citizenry the right to “free speech”?

Or will you plead the Fifth Amendment?

Next.

I didn’t read your article as your first paragraph contained no information or hook of any kind. I even tried to read your second paragraph out of respect to Crikey, but there was nothing there, either.

If Crikey expects to survive with his kind of sloppy, self indulgent writing – blogorrhea instead of journalism – it is in for a nasty shock, especially if it expects to be paid for it.

A Reader