Acta signed!!!!

[sirkickyass]

Great point about some music industry mafia don sitting on on a meeting that was kept secret from the public.

Also, great point about China and Russia not signing it. What have we come to if China and Russia are the ones with unobtrusive governments looking out for the people, while the USA gives mafia dons authority to perform deep packet inspection without a warrant?

Wow, I never thought I would see this in my lifetime.

This is probably not what you think it is. I don't know that much about ACTA, but I'm very familiar with TRIPS. That's an economic competitiveness and policing issue, not some kind of human rights issue.

 

[DutchJazzer]

I've had enough of corrupt crooks ramming through laws

 

[SaltyDawg]

This is argument by analogy though. I think you're going to have to do a little more explaining regarding why deep packet inspection is fundamentally different from what is authorized under present US law and what specific rights are violated.

I think there's sort of this maxim at work that everything about the internet is totally free that's guiding a thought process here. I don't believe that's necessarily true or even particularly wise so I'm not jumping all over any boogeyman as a result.

Currently you need a warrant to gain access to someone's data. You can't just install a spy app on my computer and intercept my data without a warrant (unless you suspect me of being a terrorist or whatever under the patriot act). Deep packet inspection makes that private data available to whoever is implementing it.

So for example, right now the local law enforcement needs a warrant to monitor your internet browsing. Under this some record company exec would be able to not only monitor it, but have all of your info, without a warrant. Deep packet inspection doesn't just give you the url of a site visited, it basically records the screen and all keystrokes, mouse clicks, etc. It mirrors your computer(s) and saves it like a recording.

And this is being considered without a warrant, and allowing non government entities to do it too. It's absolutely mind blowing that Rupert Murdoch, for example, will have the legal authority to utilize deep packet inspection on citizens of this country without a warrant.

 

[DutchJazzer]

This is probably not what you think it is. I don't know that much about ACTA, but I'm very familiar with TRIPS. That's an economic competitiveness and policing issue, not some kind of human rights issue.

how is it not a human right issue?
deep packet inspection.
surveillance without warrants.
"Punishment" without a trial?
possible freedom of speech violations.
accessibility to free information might be restricted(information that has no copyright on it)

aren't those human rights?

 

[DutchJazzer]

deniying human rights organizations to oversee/attend the acta negotiations while some fat greesy ceo of some private company was allowed in is in essence a human rights violations. or not?

 

[The Thriller]

I have no clue what ACTA is. A protein right? But....

Which ever position big business, wall street, and rich people are for, I'll be against.

 

[One Brow]

In intenet terms, deep packet inspection would be a lot like the government being able to randomly turn on a camera in your personal bedroom for no other reason than they saw a lot of people enter your home.

If you're living on the street, or in some other public property. The internet is not like your home. You are sending packets around tens or hundreds of servers that you don't own, putting them on public display. If you walk around town with holes in your clothes, people are going to see you skin.

 

[DutchJazzer]

If you're living on the street, or in some other public property. The internet is not like your home. You are sending packets around tens or hundreds of servers that you don't own, putting them on public display. If you walk around town with holes in your clothes, people are going to see you skin.

problem is depe packet inspection is like walking the street fully cloth but some people have advanced xray vision the one i used to dream about when i was a teenager

 

[One Brow]

problem is depe packet inspection is like walking the street fully cloth but some people have advanced xray vision the one i used to dream about when i was a teenager

Unless they are actually installing software on your machine, they can only see what you show to the public. Is anyone claiming that ACTA allows people to install software on personal PCs?

 

[DutchJazzer]

Unless they are actually installing software on your machine, they can only see what you show to the public. Is anyone claiming that ACTA allows people to install software on personal PCs?

you clearly dont know what you are talking about.
when i skype with someone is that shown to the public? really? Guess not it's a personal.
but ok. this message is "shown" tot he public but other stufff is not.

 

[DutchJazzer]

also your email to your mom is it public?

if so would you send me a copy off all those emails?
also the emails you send to Irs(DONT KNOW IF irs DOES STUFF ONLINE in USA but over here they do)

 

[DutchJazzer]

you know what one brow the more i think about it the more i think you are just janking my chain. cus nobody can be that Stupid/naiv

 

[SaltyDawg]

If you're living on the street, or in some other public property. The internet is not like your home. You are sending packets around tens or hundreds of servers that you don't own, putting them on public display. If you walk around town with holes in your clothes, people are going to see you skin.

So are all of your phone calls public too? They also use lots of "public" equipment that you don't own. In fact, most phone companies are "digital" now which means they convert your voice signal to packet data and send it across the internet, using the exact same servers you are talking about.

Like Dutch said, you obviously have no idea what you are talking about. The internet is absolutely not fair game for data interception and it is in fact highly illegal without a warrant. This ACTA changes that.

 

[DutchJazzer]

also this acta agremnt will make certain debugging tools illegal. that has major implications sure debugging tools are used to circumvent copyprotections. but debugging tools are an important for computers.

eg let's say i got some sort of (cr)apple machine. and i buy an android ap. with debugging tool i could see how said app works and port it to a mac. now why would i do that you may ask cus i BOUGHT the ap for an android device i no longer have. but i still have the right to the program.


anyways when i get a blue screen of death on my windows machine i could use debugging tools to fix the error. this acta agreement might prevent that.
forcing me to bring it to some sort of crap genius bar or gurus bar with overweight guys who only have some basic understanding of said hardware and problems. so i get a half assed solution to my problem.

I like tweaking my system. i use certain tools that will be illegal if acta has its way. so yeah acta might not instal software on my pc but it WILL prevent me from installing stuff on it

 

[sirkickyass]

So are all of your phone calls public too? They also use lots of "public" equipment that you don't own. In fact, most phone companies are "digital" now which means they convert your voice signal to packet data and send it across the internet, using the exact same servers you are talking about.

Like Dutch said, you obviously have no idea what you are talking about. The internet is absolutely not fair game for data interception and it is in fact highly illegal without a warrant. This ACTA changes that.

Now here's where you're crossing into my territory. That's not settled law. If you believe it is, then you're just wrong.

The reality is that the internet shares features of the public and private domain, and we're in a state of flux. Different courts in the US have come out different ways on the seizability of data transmissions and court machinery lags behind technological changes. Many cases on the issue, for example, talk about it in terms of pen registers because the internet was more closely tied to the traditional phone system at the time the cases were decided. The farther we drift from that access model, the more the analogy breaks down. Many of the relevant laws were originally drafted in the late 1960s and 1970s, making application of them to the internet pretty difficult.

The assertion that freedom from "deep packet inspection" is some kind of human right is frankly a little bizarre. It wouldn't even have been cognizable as a right of any kind 20 years ago, much less a fundamental one. It's also weird that you guys are going crazy over ACTA but I don't remember anything on this board predicting the sky would fall during the Carnivore or CALEA days. Much of the push seems to have been taken care of there that you all are both so concerned about.

 

[DutchJazzer]

I got a windows vista license. i KNow vista sucks. but i wont shell out bi dollars for windows 7. so after a couple of days of debugging using certain tool. registry additions/substraction. now i have vista that is stable and perfect.
i know vista sucks. but its build on the same kernel as windows 7.
anywho. it saved me moeney form buyiong windows 7. and it was also a fun experience

 

[DutchJazzer]

Now here's where you're crossing into my territory. That's not settled law. If you believe it is, then you're just wrong.

The reality is that the internet shares features of the public and private domain, and we're in a state of flux. Different courts in the US have come out different ways on the seizability of data transmissions and court machinery lags behind technological changes. Many cases on the issue, for example, talk about it in terms of pen registers because the internet was more closely tied to the traditional phone system at the time the cases were decided. The farther we drift from that access model, the more the analogy breaks down. Many of the relevant laws were originally drafted in the late 1960s and 1970s, making application of them to the internet pretty difficult.

The assertion that freedom from "deep packet inspection" is some kind of human right is frankly a little bizarre. It wouldn't even have been cognizable as a right of any kind 20 years ago, much less a fundamental one. It's also weird that you guys are going crazy over ACTA but I don't remember anything on this board predicting the sky would fall during the Carnivore or CALEA days. Much of the push seems to have been taken care of there that you all are both so concerned about.

still private companies can inspect my data.
my mail to my mother. my tax returns you name it.
not the goverment. but private non govermental companies without a warrant can do that. is that right?

 

[DutchJazzer]

alos american privacy laws are different then european ones. this acta agreement is in violation of certain laws. yet the usa pushes rams and cram this law down our throats. backed by the big studios.
so "fighting" for freedom in iraq and middle east. but limiting freedom in europa.
sosliders who died for freedom, sadly died in vain even more so.
when egypt wanted freedom usa did nothing when europe has freedom usa violates it. but he bringing freedom and democracy.
is it democracy that peoples representaive arent allowed in.
or that countries with 10+% of world population decide what happens to the world and internet? democracy my ***.

to come back at my first post and my so called hate for "USA". USA is dead now it is USH UNited states of hippocracy.

 

[sirkickyass]

USA is dead now it is USH UNited states of hippocracy.

 

[SaltyDawg]

Now here's where you're crossing into my territory. That's not settled law. If you believe it is, then you're just wrong.

The reality is that the internet shares features of the public and private domain, and we're in a state of flux. Different courts in the US have come out different ways on the seizability of data transmissions and court machinery lags behind technological changes. Many cases on the issue, for example, talk about it in terms of pen registers because the internet was more closely tied to the traditional phone system at the time the cases were decided. The farther we drift from that access model, the more the analogy breaks down. Many of the relevant laws were originally drafted in the late 1960s and 1970s, making application of them to the internet pretty difficult.

The assertion that freedom from "deep packet inspection" is some kind of human right is frankly a little bizarre. It wouldn't even have been cognizable as a right of any kind 20 years ago, much less a fundamental one. It's also weird that you guys are going crazy over ACTA but I don't remember anything on this board predicting the sky would fall during the Carnivore or CALEA days. Much of the push seems to have been taken care of there that you all are both so concerned about.

It may not be "settled law" per se, but I challenge you to ask any ISP out there for a record of someone's internet history. They will without a doubt tell you to get a subpoena. Even if you are the chief of police investigating a murder or rape or whatever, they will still tell you to get a subpoena. And this is for a history of sites visited. Imagine trying to get a real time window that you can record for permanent record?

Plus, like I was saying earlier, the majority of landline telephone conversations are also converted to data and sent across an IP network. This is also part of the 4G standard and soon most cell phone conversations will be sent as packet data across the internet. I don't think there is any question that tapping phones without a warrant is illegal...

So would you be okay with Rupert Murdoch having legal authority to tap whatever phone he wants without a warrant, and intercept all data to and from whoever he wants? Because this ACTA basically gives him authority to do that (from what I have read anyway).

Also, I posted a while back about how our Homeland Security seized some sites, check this out:
https://mashable.com/2010/11/27/homeland-security-website-seized/

This was during the Wikileaks thing. Homeland Security was never intended for this. They seized these websites (which were all sites distributing the Wikileaks data) in the name or piracy. The last thing we need to be doing is giving them (and private entities also) even more authority in the name of piracy.