White Hat Hackers Would Have Their Devices Destroyed Under the TPP - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Awesomecaek;48887784]"This treaty will do all these really great sweeping changes!" "No, no negative effects, nobody will remember this treaty happened at all." No bias anywhere, no. What a fucking joke.[/QUOTE] He's been like this for a few months now. I'm not sure if he's just totally delusional, or if there are genuinely people other than him who are as misinformed, ignorant, and totally sold on this as he is. Unless you're a government official or major company in any of the member states of the TPP, this doesn't affect you in any positive way. There's absolutely no reason any regular citizen should be for this; it's a treaty for big business and big government.

[QUOTE=Sobotnik;48887637]i'm pretty sure the tpp isn't going to be restricting freedoms on the level that anybody here is making it out to be people are going on about how bad it is when there are trade treaties which are effectively the same as TPP that have been introduced over the past decade without anyone noticing them[/QUOTE] People like you glaze over, ignore, and don't even seem to care, or be aware that we need to publicly oppose elements of the TPP, but no, you're really saying "You can't criticize this.". You're undemocratic. [editline]12th October 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=Sobotnik;48887792]Last I heard, the full text of the TPP is going to be out sometime late this month or in November.[/QUOTE] Once it's reasonably speaking too late for any actual stoppage?

[QUOTE=woolio1;48887819]He's been like this for a few months now. I'm not sure if he's just totally delusional, or if there are genuinely people other than him who are as misinformed, ignorant, and totally sold on this as he is. Unless you're a government official or major company in any of the member states of the TPP, this doesn't affect you in any positive way. There's absolutely no reason any regular citizen should be for this; it's a treaty for big business and big government.[/QUOTE] It's exactly like the keystone XL pipeline, nobody knew exactly how useless or bad it was they just listened to the conservative muppets and big business lobby and assumed it was good, when it was a useless pipeline, pulling oil from the most environmentally destructive sources, and only existed to enrich two guys, while all the people who lost land, or would be hurt from any spill wouldn't have any avenue to deal with the fallout. Few people understood the difference between keystone and XL and just willfully ignored the rest of the industry saying it was overly risky and unneeded People can be really good at voting against their own interests and survival

[QUOTE=Sableye;48888003]It's exactly like the keystone XL pipeline, nobody knew exactly how useless or bad it was they just listened to the conservative muppets and big business lobby and assumed it was good, when it was a useless pipeline, pulling oil from the most environmentally destructive sources, and only existed to enrich two guys, while all the people who lost land, or would be hurt from any spill wouldn't have any avenue to deal with the fallout. Few people understood the difference between keystone and XL and just willfully ignored the rest of the industry saying it was overly risky and unneeded People can be really good at voting against their own interests and survival[/QUOTE] people think the economy is worth sacrificing everything for, praise be the new god the old ones are dead

[QUOTE=Sobotnik;48887637]people are going on about how bad it is when there are trade treaties which are effectively the same as TPP that have been introduced over the past decade without anyone noticing them[/QUOTE]i'd rather not take my chance to let it pass just to see if it really is that bad, because things like this are irreversible

[QUOTE=woolio1;48887819]He's been like this for a few months now. I'm not sure if he's just totally delusional, or if there are genuinely people other than him who are as misinformed, ignorant, and totally sold on this as he is. Unless you're a government official or major company in any of the member states of the TPP, this doesn't affect you in any positive way. There's absolutely no reason any regular citizen should be for this; it's a treaty for big business and big government.[/QUOTE] Some people just believe free market is the only good in this world and that it should freely reign over us all.

Copyright is going to be the death of human progress as we know it. Innovation is the only thing that keeps progress going these days and without it, as copyright wants to take away, we can't do it.

[QUOTE=Awesomecaek;48888171]Some people just believe free market is the only good in this world and that it should freely reign over us all.[/QUOTE] To hell with the free market. I'd sooner live in a Scandanavian-based socialist democracy with high taxes than be left out on my ass open to getting screwed over by the latest corporate fucknut in favour.

[QUOTE=Ninja Gnome;48888031]people think the economy is worth sacrificing everything for, praise be the new god the old ones are dead[/QUOTE] Oh the fools, those who forget the old gods are the first to have their minds scoured by their wisperings

[QUOTE=Sableye;48888270]Oh the fools, those who forget the old gods are the first to have their minds scoured by their wisperings[/QUOTE] civil liberties are the new babies for the sacred pit

This thread got pretty eldritch pretty fast.

[quote] “judicial authorities shall, at least, have the authority to [...] order the destruction of devices and products found to be involved in"[/quote] [quote]In civil judicial proceedings concerning the acts described in Article QQ.G.10 (TPMs) and Article QQ.G.12 (RMI), [B]each Party shall provide that its judicial authorities shall, at least, have the authority to[/B]: (a) impose provisional measures, including seizure or other taking into custody of devices and products suspected of being involved in the prohibited activity; (b) order the type of damages available for copyright infringement, as provided under its regime in accordance with Article QQ.H.4121; (c) order court costs, fees, or expenses as provided for under Article QQ.H.4.11; and [B](d) order the destruction of devices and products found to be involved in the prohibited activity.[/B] [/quote] This doesnt change anything that already isnt true in court proceedings. Not to mention that nowhere in the leaked article are the acts of "QQ.G.10" or "QQ.G.12" defined. Shit-tier journalism VICE. This is complete speculation at best.

[QUOTE=Awesomecaek;48887370]But it's a really great trade deal that will make everyone a lot of money so it's a very good idea!!!!!![/QUOTE] "Everyone"... well I guess if we strip the poor and middleclass of their humanity.

Question, All the stuff in china don't care about this sort of stuff. How will they stop that? Also. I don't really understand why they would put an agreement in that stops all services and such that we had before? Now if your car breaks down you need to take it back to the dealership no repairing parts yourself or taking it to a mechanic. DRM, I'm sorry you can't do that buy another one. However i'm sure it would only take extreme enforcement of this to maybe get people to think this is a bad idea.

[QUOTE=Awesomecaek;48887370]But it's a really great trade deal that will make everyone a lot of money so it's a very good idea!!!!!![/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Sobotnik;48887427]of course it's a good idea, it's one of the largest international trade treaties yet, eliminating over 95% tariffs and seeking to further regulate existing trade and commerce. one of the good things it does is reduce overfishing by reducing the subsidies that fishing fleets get, promotes the right of trade unions to assemble and strike in vietnam, works to limit human trafficking in malaysia, us corporations don't get as much as they originally asked for, it places restrictions on trading in endangered animals/plants, while subsidies/protections for agriculture are finally starting to be dropped opening up formerly restricted markets (like japan)[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Awesomecaek;48887518]And what does any of that have to do with the shit in the OP? Yes, these are great things, but the nonsense that's going on on the side has nothing to do with it and has no right to be in, and the entire thing should fucking tank over it, because it's not acceptable. If ecological change and social security for workers can't be passed without severe hindrance of personal liberties then fuck that shit, something has to change systemically.[/QUOTE] So you sarcastically mock the idea that there are beneficial parts to the TPP in spite of not-so-beneficial parts like this, then when someone lists some examples of beneficial parts of the TPP, you attack them because it's not relevant to the OP? That's a pretty dishonest bait-and-switch right there.

Dozens of other free-trade agreements that include such clauses have already been signed without significant public outcry. Why is the TPP getting all this attention?

[QUOTE=Headhumpy;48888896]Dozens of other free-trade agreements that include such clauses have already been signed without significant public outcry. Why is the TPP getting all this attention?[/QUOTE] That's horrifically fallacious [editline]12th October 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=catbarf;48888668]So you sarcastically mock the idea that there are beneficial parts to the TPP in spite of not-so-beneficial parts like this, then when someone lists some examples of beneficial parts of the TPP, you attack them because it's not relevant to the OP? That's a pretty dishonest bait-and-switch right there.[/QUOTE] I think the fact that most people want to talk about what amounts to little more than "riders" on a bill that will affect our lives in serious ways but are then ignored so that whoever can sweep them under the rug to tout economic benefits that come at great cost is the real bait and switch. Sobotinik, thread to thread, dodges any and all posts that deal with IP issues to focus on economic issues like there's no reason to be critical

[QUOTE=Headhumpy;48888896]Dozens of other free-trade agreements that include such clauses have already been signed without significant public outcry. Why is the TPP getting all this attention?[/QUOTE] it's because it tangentially affects millennial westerners who get outraged because virtually all of the information they get on it isn't from actual economic journals or people who know international trade, but instead from selectively posted facepunch threads and memes to be honest i wouldn't give much of a shit, but the intense circlejerk over how TPP is some sort of treaty that basically abolishes the internet and throws you in prison for burning a cd is utterly ludicrous and is based on some of the trashiest journalism that gets you up in arms i genuinely believe that upon the TPP text becoming publicly available, that about 95% of the entire internet is going to read it for five minutes, get bored, and then close the tab [QUOTE=Passing;48888661]Also. I don't really understand why they would put an agreement in that stops all services and such that we had before? Now if your car breaks down you need to take it back to the dealership no repairing parts yourself or taking it to a mechanic.[/QUOTE] the treaty doesn't mean that's going to happen you'll still be able to repair it yourself or take it to a mechanic, same with tractors and shit (idk where people are getting the idea that TPP bans this) also the treaty means that american companies can't keep drugs exclusive for 12 years, it means that american companies are now only allowed to keep them for 5-8 years

i said it before and i'll say it again, as long as something has capitalism and free-trade written all over it, sobotnik will furiously defend it, because fuck logic.

[QUOTE=Wizards Court;48889119]i said it before and i'll say it again, as long as something has capitalism and free-trade written all over it, sobotnik will furiously defend it, because fuck logic.[/QUOTE] Are you saying that capitalism and free trade are illogical? [editline]13th October 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=HumanAbyss;48889044]That's horrifically fallacious[/QUOTE] Why is it fallacious? I'm pointing out the cognitive dissonance and hypocrisy that everyone is exhibiting over this issue. The NAFTA, for example, contains similarly extensive IP protection clauses, yet no one bats an eyelid to those. What makes the TPP so special that everyone should criticise it over existing free trade agreements?

[QUOTE=Headhumpy;48889162]Are you saying that capitalism and free trade are illogical? [editline]13th October 2015[/editline] Why is it fallacious? I'm pointing out the cognitive dissonance and hypocrisy that everyone is exhibiting over this issue. The NAFTA, for example, contains similarly extensive IP protection clauses, yet no one bats an eyelid to those. What makes the TPP so special that everyone should criticise it over existing free trade agreements?[/QUOTE] Uh what? There was a huge hubbub over NAFTA.

[QUOTE=catbarf;48888668]So you sarcastically mock the idea that there are beneficial parts to the TPP in spite of not-so-beneficial parts like this, then when someone lists some examples of beneficial parts of the TPP, you attack them because it's not relevant to the OP? That's a pretty dishonest bait-and-switch right there.[/QUOTE] We know that there's (arguably) beneficial parts to the TTP. I, and I dare say the other posters that oppose it, simply don't think it's worth giving so much ground to corporations in exchange. I find it absolutely absurd that a corporation would be able to bring a nation to court because they did something they disagree with. And all the shit involving copyright isn't good either.

[QUOTE=catbarf;48888668]So you sarcastically mock the idea that there are beneficial parts to the TPP in spite of not-so-beneficial parts like this, then when someone lists some examples of beneficial parts of the TPP, you attack them because it's not relevant to the OP? That's a pretty dishonest bait-and-switch right there.[/QUOTE] Even funnier coming out of the guy who thought nothing could go wrong with China lowering your credit score because of political opinions.

We need legislation that prevents dickbeaters from sneaking shit like this in and making all bills publicly accessible for review. Not this last minute shit that has to be leaked for people to get a glimpse.

[QUOTE=MR-X;48889583]We need legislation that prevents dickbeaters from sneaking shit like this in and making all bills publicly accessible for review. Not this last minute shit that has to be leaked for people to get a glimpse.[/QUOTE] Outlaw riders. Call for FAR more transparency. If it affects our everyday lives in ANY way, we have a right to be informed about it.

[QUOTE=Wolfos;48889422]We know that there's (arguably) beneficial parts to the TTP. I, and I dare say the other posters that oppose it, simply don't think it's worth giving so much ground to corporations in exchange. I find it absolutely absurd that a corporation would be able to bring a nation to court because they did something they disagree with.[/QUOTE] I find it very hard to decide how I feel about the TPP because the online reaction has been extreme beyond all reasonable proportion, constantly leaning on hyperbole. Take that idea of a corporation taking a nation to court 'because they did something they disagree with'- it's nothing more draconian than allowing corporations to sue if a country that signs the trade agreement violates the rules. Instead of expecting the other signatories to the treaty to take the time and expense to make sure that everyone follows the rules, they let the affected organizations go to court instead. Isn't that how it [i]should[/i] be? Instead of corporations getting their parent countries to spend money on their behalf to go to court? Instead of giving countries free reign to ignore the trade agreements that they signed, and screw over companies that are playing by the rules? How, in an ideal world, [i]should[/i] this work? Not to mention this kind of enforcement clause has been a staple of trade agreements for decades- but frame it as 'corporations can sue any country that does something they dislike' and suddenly it's an effective scare tactic. I can't simply accept that there are legitimate concerns over the TPP when they're wrapped up in this sort of alarmism.

[QUOTE=catbarf;48890269]I find it very hard to decide how I feel about the TPP because the online reaction has been extreme beyond all reasonable proportion, constantly leaning on hyperbole. Take that idea of a corporation taking a nation to court 'because they did something they disagree with'- it's nothing more draconian than allowing corporations to sue if a country that signs the trade agreement violates the rules. Instead of expecting the other signatories to the treaty to take the time and expense to make sure that everyone follows the rules, they let the affected organizations go to court instead. Isn't that how it [i]should[/i] be? Instead of corporations getting their parent countries to spend money on their behalf to go to court? Instead of giving countries free reign to ignore the trade agreements that they signed, and screw over companies that are playing by the rules? How, in an ideal world, [i]should[/i] this work? Not to mention this kind of enforcement clause has been a staple of trade agreements for decades- but frame it as 'corporations can sue any country that does something they dislike' and suddenly it's an effective scare tactic. I can't simply accept that there are legitimate concerns over the TPP when they're wrapped up in this sort of alarmism.[/QUOTE] I don't know if you've actually read what little has been leaked, but the problem is that it's very ambiguous. It goes beyond protecting the rights of companies instead of just letting governments break the rules. Corporations could sue over pretty much anything that they percieve has resulted in reduced profits for them. It's not just protecting companies, it's putting them above governments.

[QUOTE=catbarf;48890269]Take that idea of a corporation taking a nation to court 'because they did something they disagree with'- it's nothing more draconian than allowing corporations to sue if a country that signs the trade agreement violates the rules.[/QUOTE] I dunno, the most relevant example is probably something that happened after NAFTA passed. A US chemical company had started exporting MMT to Canada which was banned under Canadian law due to health concerns. After being told to stop, they took Canada to court and as a result Canada had to change their law and legalize the chemical. I could see this being used by companies to export things they are legal here but banned elsewhere. I don't have any specific examples, but I know that some of the tricks our food companies pull aren't allowed in other countries because of health concerns. But with this, they might not have a choice.

[QUOTE=catbarf;48888668]So you sarcastically mock the idea that there are beneficial parts to the TPP in spite of not-so-beneficial parts like this, then when someone lists some examples of beneficial parts of the TPP, you attack them because it's not relevant to the OP? That's a pretty dishonest bait-and-switch right there.[/QUOTE] The positive parts could easily be a promise of cure to cancer and world peace, they are perfectly irrelevant. This treaty comes with unacceptable evils and shouldn't be allowed to pass no matter what. It doesn't matter how much "good" would it bring. It doesn't justify it. [editline]13th October 2015[/editline] I don't sarcastically mock the positive points because I don't think they exist, I mock them because they don't matter and unless you can debunk every single IP concern and general leverage in hands of the corporations then I will keep fighting the treaty with all my (admittedly very limited) ability.

The copyright provisions of the TPP are mostly the same as existing copyright provisions already active in the US. The odds that any of you will notice a difference after the TPP passes are very small.