Acta signed!!!!

[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.

 

[sirkickyass]

A few points: In the ISP case the rights-holder is the ISP, not the individual user. That's why, for example, the RIAA has been able to obtain identities of students relatively easily by simply serving the complaint on Universities that are operating as ISPs and naming X number of John Doe defendants. That's hardly a real legal barrier. That's a filing fee and a "please."

I also think the interpretation that private companies are going to gain governmental authority seems a bit strained and like a relatively radical interpretation of what's going on. If true, that would be troublesome. I haven't seen any convincing evidence that's the case from any information that's been posted. Dutch spent some time talking about a specific case with Warner Brothers, but that case clearly involves a tool that was agreed upon between Warner and the website itself rather than some legal right obtained by Warner without the website's consent. As a result it has essentially no bearing on ACTA.

Piracy is a real issue and has been essentially since the internet was born. Dutch is a known and admitted pirate. It doesn't take a genius to figure out why he's really upset about anti-piracy measures.

 

[One Brow]

also your email to your mom is it public?

Yes, it's going through a public media.

if so would you send me a copy off all those emails?

No. But if you do some digging and pull the emails off the internet, I have no righ to claim you invaded my provacy.

also the emails you send to Irs(DONT KNOW IF irs DOES STUFF ONLINE in USA but over here they do)

Again, anything you can pull off the internet is something I have no right to claim is an invasion of my privacy.

 

[One Brow]

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.

If you buy a phone service from a company that does that, you are making your conversations public.

Like Dutch said, you obviously have no idea what you are talking about.

Your dislike of my claims does not make them untrue or inaccurate. You have not dispute any issue of fact I have offered, so for all your bluster about my having no idea, you seem to accept my ideas. You just reject the implications. Your cognitive dissonance is not my problem, and I will not change my opinions to respect it.

The internet is absolutely not fair game for data interception and it is in fact highly illegal without a warrant.

Do you have any case law to cite for this?

This ACTA changes that.

I don't see any change in that regard.

 

[LogGrad98]

If you buy a phone service from a company that does that, you are making your conversations public.

So are you in favor of or opposed to warrantless monitoring of your telephone conversations? This has been in court many times and it has been made pretty clear this requires a warrant of some kind, outside of Patriot Act issues.