Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!


TPP Document Leaked
New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.

All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
«13

Comments

  • Is there a summary of the problematic paragraphs?

  • It would be nice to have a General Summary of the Problematic areas.

    Thanked by 14n0nx
  • deadbeefdeadbeef Member
    edited October 2015

    "C'mon guys, we want our enragement fix, quick somebody tell me what we're saving the world from this time"

    On a tad more serious note, where's @joepie91 to tell us the gist of it? :)

  • LeeLee Veteran

    If you can't be bothered to read it then it's not important to you.

  • @Lee said:
    If you can't be bothered to read it then it's not important to you.

    Read, as it, like, what I did ... at ... school? Are you f*cking crazy? :o

    Thanked by 2Lee Maounique
  • TrafficTraffic Member
    edited October 2015

    @4n0nx said:
    Is there a summary of the problematic paragraphs?


    @sjr2004 said:
    It would be nice to have a General Summary of the Problematic areas.

    I think you guys are missing a few Speed Reading methods.

    EDIT: Sorry. This one is better.

  • @Traffic said:
    I think you guys are missing a few Speed Reading methods.

    That thing where you pass through all the black dots super fast and then don't remember shit? :D

    Thanked by 1Traffic
  • @deadbeef said:
    That thing where you pass through all the black dots super fast and then don't remember shit? :D

    See? You've read through it! Nah, I added a special version for them, much shorter and concise. See above.

    Thanked by 1deadbeef
  • jhjh Member

    There is an expert summary on Wikileaks' Twitter account but in my opinion, the summary is that things will cost more outside the US and that extra will go to the US.

  • raindog308raindog308 Administrator, Veteran

    jh said: things will cost more outside the US and that extra will go to the US.

    Approved.

  • jarjar Patron Provider, Top Host, Veteran
    edited October 2015

    @Lee said:
    If you can't be bothered to read it then it's not important to you.

    And you can pretty much always be sure that whoever's interpretation of it you're reading... they see what they want to see.

    Legal documents are a tough read, but if you care there's no alternative to reading it (except hiring a lawyer). People push their agendas on as little as sound bytes from someone who read the title of a legal document.

    Thanked by 2Lee deadbeef
  • singsingsingsing Member
    edited October 2015

    Heavily biased. For example:

    The changes could also lead to huge new rules about surveillance.

    “Under this TPP proposal, Internet Service Providers could be required to "police" user activity (i.e. police YOU), take down internet content, and cut people off from internet access for common user-generated content,” write Expose The TPP, a campaign group opposing the agreement.

    AFAICT, there's nothing actually in the document about cutting off anyone's Internet for posting UGC. I see only relatively reasonable requirements on Internet Service Providers like "participating in a system for forwarding notices of alleged infringement".

  • singsing said: I see only relatively reasonable requirements on Internet Service Providers like "participating in a system for forwarding notices of alleged infringement".

    But that is what is being criticized.. privatization of law enforcement..?

    At least I am pretty sure that you need a court order for content removal in he EU, which I find extremely reasonable.

  • Traffic said: I think you guys are missing a few Speed Reading methods.

    Since you have apparently "speed-read" 60 pages, how about you write a summary

  • 4n0nx said: But that is what is being criticized.. privatization of law enforcement..?

    Lolwut? Nobody's talking about ISPs doing investigations on behalf of law enforcement. Nobody. Except, apparently, "Expose the TPP".

    TPP is doing nothing more than trying to get other countries on board with laws similar to U.S. And the laws in U.S. are actually quite a favorable environment for ISPs and the Internet and not such a favorable environment for copyright holders whose works are being infringed.

    Now you can advocate for a left-leaning copy-topia society, but don't call it something else.

  • M66BM66B Veteran

    @sjr2004 said:
    It would be nice to have a General Summary of the Problematic areas.

    https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2015/10/final-leaked-tpp-text-all-we-feared

  • Chock full of propaganda. The EFF has really gone downhill lately. I remember when the EFF used to have a point, such as advocating for the rights of disabled people to circumvent DRM that prevented them from making use of media. If you did a sed s/user/freeloader/g on this latest outpouring from the EFF, it would be accurate.

    Perhaps the biggest overall defeat for users is the extension of the copyright term to life plus 70 years (QQ.G.6), despite a broad consensus that this makes no economic sense,

    Where can I find documentation of the "broad consensus" whereof they speak?

    and simply amounts to a transfer of wealth from users to large, rights-holding corporations.

    Corporations ... which ripped the copyrights out of the authors' hands in their final moments of agony before departing this world. In real life, longer copyrights means bigger rewards for authors while they are alive, and continuing royalty payments to their family after they are dead. The life of an author is not an easy one on average, and society shouldn't get in the way of allowing the few authors who enjoy a certain amount of success to reap as much benefit as possible.

    The extension will make life more difficult for libraries and archives, for journalists,

    No it doesn't, they can (and do) just pass on operating costs to ordinary users. Some libraries are actually "corporations" and most journalists work for "corporations" so ultimately only corporations are hurt by this.

    and for ordinary users seeking to make use of works from long-dead authors that rightfully belong in the public domain.

    Because ultimately all books are written by the public domain, or by "ordinary users", and not by authors as we are led to believe by the media.

  • Dead people shouldn't have any fucking rights nor should their parasitic family members inherit any money or property from dead relatives.

    Fucking inheritance enables rich families became dynasties and dictate the world what it should be.

    Your parents earned a lot of money, great, you don't deserve any of it after they die.

    You can disagree with me, but I don't care. Inheritance should be taxed at 100%.

    Thanked by 1elwebmaster
  • If you believe that intellectual property is a real thing (e.g. I don't), then it should never expire just like the ownership of your house doesn't expire after X years.

  • MaouniqueMaounique Host Rep, Veteran

    deadbeef said: the ownership of your house doesn't expire after X years.

    No, but the house needs repairs, taxes, has a risk, intelectual property doesnt, except taxes from the income it generate, while the house does not generally give you money.

  • raindog308raindog308 Administrator, Veteran

    I feel like I'm reading a freshman poly sci debate at the community college level.

  • MaouniqueMaounique Host Rep, Veteran
    edited October 2015

    Everyone should realize that IP rights are hee to stay, they do make a lot of money so they get the laws they like, that is not the problem, the problem is that the voters do not get the laws they want, that is the main issue because they cannot get organized and are not interested in politics, or are driven by hate and propaganda, whoever promises more guns, war and bombing, the "toughest", wins, so, in the end, they deserve their fate :)

  • @GM2015 said:
    Dead people shouldn't have any fucking rights nor should their parasitic family members inherit any money or property from dead relatives.

    Fucking inheritance enables rich families became dynasties and dictate the world what it should be.

    Your parents earned a lot of money, great, you don't deserve any of it after they die.

    You can disagree with me, but I don't care. Inheritance should be taxed at 100%.

    This is so true. I was also thinking about this. Inheritance hinders equality and stifles economic activity. But how do you prevent people from "gifting" all they own to their children while still alive?

  • MaouniqueMaounique Host Rep, Veteran

    elwebmaster said: This is so true. I was also thinking about this. Inheritance hinders equality and stifles economic activity. But how do you prevent people from "gifting" all they own to their children while still alive?

    It is insane to prevent people from using their legally acquired wealth the way they like, dead or alive. Those people worked hard for it, if they want to leave it to their offspring or dog, who are you to change that, as long as they paid their taxes?
    Increase taxes, right, the bigger the company/wealth, etc, the more taxation, not the other way around, because that is economy of scale, you invest 100 Eur or one billion, the revenue is not the same, 10% from 1 bn is way more than 50% of 100, here we are talking about problems, not inheritance.
    If you make 200 mil a year, you will probably spend some 2-3, say 10 at max, the rest will go to speculate the market, making it very risky and costly for the average citizen to invest, even if they know what they do, this is not how it is supposed to work, the stock market and the banks must serve some purpose int he economy, not be a burden on the taxpayer and a source of income for the rich, they must help real production and development, not be a drag on them.
    The neocons have changed the paradigm, speculation is the king, not help covering real needs through production. there is no wonder the economy is not working, will never work this way.

    Thanked by 2deadbeef Amitz
  • raindog308raindog308 Administrator, Veteran

    GM2015 said: Inheritance should be taxed at 100%.

    This farm that has been in your family for a hundred years...sorry, father died and now it must be sold and you all have to move off. Sorry about that, you Vietnamese types who've lived in your ancestral villages for a thousand years - GM2015's new regime says you need to move. He explained how you don't deserve it.

    It really is too bad that your sister is paraplegic and needs 24x7 care. Your father had set aside money to take care of her for the rest of her life, but GM2015 taxed it at 100% and now she has to go into a government institution. GM says you should stop being a parasitic family member!

    Hey there, children's charity. I know the industrial magnate left millions so you could start a new cancer wing, but GM2015 is going to take all that in taxes instead to fund some new wars, bribery, and graft. Take heart that instead of doing good with this money, we'll be pissing it away.

    This drum that your great-great-grandfather played at Waterloo and we would never sell because it's a priceless family heirloom...sorry, government says it's work $10,000, must sell on eBay.

    Oh, your dad wrote a series of children's books? Too bad some pornographer bought them from the estate and you couldn't own the titles, because now he's made them into obscene cheapo flicks using your family name.

    Etc. What GM2015 proposes is the worst form of fascism. Very typical of 16-year-olds who try to think about public policy.

    The reality is that government always wastes the money you give it and it is always a mistake to give the government more money.

    Typically people complain on the one hand about the "rich" and how we need to "tax them" to make things "just" but then complain on the other about all the wars, waste, and government stupidity that results from the taxes.

    Thanked by 1Amitz
  • @Maounique said:
    No, but the house needs repairs, taxes, has a risk, intelectual property doesnt, except taxes from the income it generate, while the house does not generally give you money.

    When you don't have a good argument, there is no need to comment just for the sake of commenting ;)

  • @elwebmaster said:
    Inheritance hinders equality and stifles economic activity

    a) F*ck equality

    b) Stifles economic activity? Are you insane? :o Exactly what's my motive to work hard to build a house and leave money for my grandkids if I'm not allowed to?

  • @Maounique said:
    It is insane to prevent people from using their legally acquired wealth the way they like, dead or alive.

    Amazingly, we agree.

  • I agree that Intellectual Property is a thing and it should be respected and protected. However i think something like 20 years is enough, after that all Intellectual Property should expire and become public domain.

Sign In or Register to comment.