http://thepiratebay.org/torrent/5425059/ACTA_Agreement_leaked_

Basically, if this goes through, ISPs have to give up any and all information about anyone the feds suspect might have any relation to piracy, without a warrant or just cause. They can't fight piracy any other way, so their resorting to breaking their own laws and violating our freedoms to protect their corporate masters' profits. This is wrong, and it will ultimately fail. Police have tried arresting suspected pirates in the past, and it only backfires. There is no stopping piracy, end of story. You can leave us alone, or only hurt the innocent in vain attempts to engage us.

Fu(k the American government. They made the internet and gave it to us, now they can reap the consequences or GTFO.

Actually, they didn't make the internet.

I could be wrong, but I believe the internet was an international project, adopted by the US military for communication, and developed by Al Gore's money for commercial use.

ARPANET = Predeccessor to internet = Military = Government

The ARPANET actually had two separate loops, the Military side and the Civilian side, connecting mainly universities, which eventually became the internet.

Edit: At least if I remember the speech given by the sender of the first spam email did at my University.

Oh, okay.

OK, I took the time to read through most of the first two chapters of the agreement earlier this evening.

First off, this agreement is not targeted at piracy on the internet, which happens to get lumped in there, unfortunately. It's really targeted at large-scale commercial counterfeiting operations.
For the most part, what this treaty does is laudable- it's intended to fight trade counterfeiting and misrepresentation of brands. If protects both consumers from unknowingly buying inferior/counterfeit products, and helps companies maintain their bottom line. Fine. The one part that worries me is Article 2.4:

Yes, this would probably be unconstitutional in the US, since it seems to me that such a demand would violate one's Fourth Amendment rights.
However, I would not call such a clause grounds to simply dismiss the entire treaty. Certainly I could not support it with the current Article 2.4, but most of the treaty makes sense and does such without infringing on basic rights.

Keep in mind, as well, that this is simply the most significant leak of the working document to date. The agreement is not final, and I doubt it will be finalized and approved by all those involved anytime soon. In addition to that, here in the US at least, the agreement would have to go through the Senate to be formally approved by the government. If you really want to see it changed, write your senator and voice your concerns, in hopes that the agreement will not be agreed to in its current form by the US government.


On a slightly different note, it seems to me that many of the potential holes where the agreement's clauses could be misused to abuse rights have been proposed by the US, while bits acting to preserve the rights of those involved have been proposed/supported by a small group of others (EU/AU/NZ come to mind). Anybody else rather disturbed by that?
In fact, both AU and NZ support the deletion of Article 2.4 entirely, which would largely void my criticisms of the agreeement.

F*cking corporate b*tches.