Let's see, the US creates the Great Firewall Of The USA, inspects every data packet, and send out invoices for certain content? Maybe they "arrest" packets too. Put them into a digital prison.
Naturally internet packets need an internet passport to pass the US border.
Yea, that might explain future high pings if you play FA
in the context of 3D printing that violates patent laws, i don't think it's that far fetched. i only skimmed the article though it might actually be talking about something else
Copyright law does need a makeover in the US, no doubt. Don't blame Judges for it though, their job is to answer the question in the suit, no more no less. Thats how it should be. Its the law that needs fixing, and although i think the law is scary as it is, i sometimes shudder thinking about how much worse it could get if lawmakers take a whack at it.
TPP has scared the crap out of me, and honestly corporate interests shouldn't dictate what happens on the internet, what happens on the internet should dictate business. Tail wagging dog scenario.
After skimming the opinion in controversy (it is 515 pages), here is what I have to say:
What a stupid thread, based on ignorance and hate for the United States Government.
Our Government has done plenty wrong, erecting "internet borders to sift through copyright violating information" isn't one of them.
We certainly have a crap-ton of international spying presence, but it seems to be entirely focused on anti-terrorism and learning state secrets, and wholly uninterested in corporate competition.
The legal question here is if sending trademark infringing data into the United States constitutes the importation of a copyright violating "article." (A legal term, found in section 1337 of the United States Code, Annotated. Heh. 1337.)
The court found that it did.
What did this do? Close a loophole, that otherwise would allow any party sending data into the United States, from abroad, via the internet, to be immune to copyright violations.
There is absolutely nothing here about a "Great Firewall" other than in the writer of that blog's imagination.
Just that if you send your "Where is Wildo" E-Books, and your "Barnnei the Purple Elephant: Children Show" Mp4s into the United States from abroad, you will have committed an unfair practice in the business trade, and be subject to penalty. If someone files a claim.
For all practical purposes, the Government will only act on these violations when the copy-right holders bring them to the commission's attention. Although they are free to act on their own initiative, I guarantee you that there are so many legal walls stopping the USITC from actively monitoring the internet, I wouldn't even care to expound upon the most basic of them.
And yes, its the United States International Trade Commission. Our internal body for regulating international trade. Not some Illuminati.
I am pissed that you all would even jump on this without knowing a thing about it. It detracts from the REAL problems with corporate influence in the United States, like anti-consumer copyright law and degrading open internet policy. As far as we all should be concerned, anti "Pakistan Dental Imaging Ripoff" law should be a good damn thing. Unless you are a Pakistani that likes to rip off US dental imaging copyrights.
Note: Not intending to single out Pakistani citizens. That is just where the company that was sending the data was incorporated.
Last edited by Malicious Wraith on Fri Oct 24, 2014 4:20 am, edited 1 time in total.
Unknown wrote:[Just want] to play some games before Alleg dies for good.
I don't want that time to be a @#(!-storm of hate and schadenfreude.
I find this "border guard" internet movement very dangerous. First of all it does not work. Someone will find a way to push the data through. Second it will cost a fortune and a lot of people keeping that digital border intact. Thirdly it will make privacy and secrets a thing of the past since everything on the internet must be checked for "illegal" content.
There are plenty of legal actions to take if someone plays a pirated movie, or uses a copycat iFoone. I am not really sure about 3D printing but it Apple can produce iPhone covers which are protected by copyright law, should it not be possible to legally protect the 3D "prints"?
O, and don't be so lazy as our politicians which found nothing better than to "tax" recording media. For example a "fee" is added to blanc DVD recordable discs which is supposed to be given to artists. Even mp3 players and multimedia phones have that fee.
Every single bit is be asked "are you a terrorist". Those who reply TRUE are stored in a special harddisk in guantanamo. Those who reply FALSE lie and therefore are xortured.
