• commentary
  • SUNDAY JUNE 1 2008 10:00 AM

Welcome to Canada, We (Used to) Have Rights.

Submitted by zenFish

Edited by crispy

Tags: Canada, DCMA, ATCA, counterfeit rights, freedom

If you read this article, every last word, let it all sink in deep and then ask yourself one question.

What are you willing to do, peacefully, for your rights and freedoms?

Like most Canadians, I live a pretty simple life. Work fills most of my time, and my personal time is filled with whatever I can. I keep to myself, hang out with friends, and generally don’t worry about a single thing in my life. We live in one of the best countries in the world; there are our issues, but slowly those are being dealt with. When it comes down to the grit of it, there isn’t much to worry about, and we can somewhat ‘trust’ our government to do us well. This was until a few days ago when I first learned of ACTA -- the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement.

Upon seeing it on Wikileaks, I took a quick peek, but nothing really registered. I mean, from the title, it’s all just about bootleg DVDs, and knock off Gucci, right? Since then, it’s hit a few newspapers, few blogs, and has gotten a little attention ... and all of the attention I have seen it garner on the internet and in newsprint has been very bad.

The Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) is a proposed plurilateral trade agreement that would impose strict enforcement of intellectual property rights related to Internet activity and trade in information-based goods. The agreement is being secretly negotiated by the governments of the United States, the European Commission, Japan, Switzerland, Australia, New Zealand, South Korea, Canada, and Mexico. If adopted at the 34th G8 summit in July 2008, the treaty would establish an international coalition against copyright infringement, imposing a strong, top-down enforcement regime of copyright laws in developed nations.


For a while now, the United States has allowed their border guards to go into people's personal items and search the data on their digital devices. Every time I hear of this, it makes me chill slightly as I would love to not only visit that country, but live there someday. It is my general hope that the next President of the United States alters this approach, and puts the U.S.A. back on track. This proposed agreement would put those same rules in my country. This means that when traveling, I would have to deal with those same issues of having my laptop, cellphone, or iPod “looked at” or copied to make sure that I am not harming anyone's “special interests.”

If you download the document and give it a read, it’s going to come off as a lot of legal jargon, and for the most part not that bad. Dig into it just a little deeper and you’ll find that the majority of the Act is all about going after single persons, not large groups or organized criminals that want to profit from large scale operations. It would effect anyone going through the border, persons at home who are sharing data, and, as one last “fuck you”, to any sites that host links to torrents. I’m not going to name any of those sites, as I’m sure anyone here can find one, and more so we’re all good little persons who don’t copy anything.

Here is a fun shortlist of what would become law in Canada (and the other countries listed) if this is signed. I say ‘signed’ and not ‘passed’ for a reason, as I found out digging in a article that federal trade acts in Canada DO NOT see the House of Commons or the Senate. Once they are signed, we either uphold them or face financial penalties or who knows what else in this case. See NAFTA, or the Softwood Lumber Agreement for details. No offense to Americans, but we Canadians generally hate both of those agreements as we got the short stick which was thus lit on fire.

  • Internet Service Providers: Would be “protected” from lawsuits, provided they cooperated with law enforcement to assist in the removal of infringing material.

    Translation: If someone captures your IP as sending out data they don’t want sent, ISPs would then give up said information, without warrants, to police.

  • Internet Piracy: Significant willful infringements without motivation for financial gain to such an extent as to prejudicially affect the copyright owner.

    Translation: Remember those sites that I mentioned? Those would be what they are talking about. However, in another outlook that could also be applied to Wikileaks, or any other website that chooses to take up the same charge.

  • Border Guards: They would now be charged with the search/seizure (possible destruction) of digital devices that carry such items that are deemed illegal. Also, be given the right to put ‘deterrent penalties’ on persons involved. I’m going to guess that isn’t for tea and biscuits.

  • Civil Enforcement: The worst one of all. Authorities would be granted the right to go after people breaking said laws without any complaints from the rights holders.


    • Still here? Not too shaken, I hope. Possibly even going through that document yourself with a legal dictionary on hand to really dig into the meat of the document?

    Hopefully, you are, as this isn’t going to be a document that will effect only a few of us, it’s going to be sea to sea to sea. While I have no issues with impacting those that make money off of the proliferation of counterfeit items (in the Act, so far, there is only one sentence that does that), I have issues with going into people's personal laptops for songs copied, without any proof that it’s not a legal copy. There is no definition, that I can find, that covers a “legal" copy, which leads me to think the persons having this document pressed into service expect people to buy the digital along with the physical copy.

    This document - this ‘Act’, as it were - gives too much power to many individuals. In my mind, too many. I now have to think that if/when I go traveling overseas, I’m going to have to wipe my laptop and cellphone, and leave my iPod at home, lest I want to travel at all. When it comes down to it, this isn’t something a minority government should be able to agree on, or press into a full act for my country. I am also surprised, but not completely shocked, that trade agreements do not go through our House of Commons, or the Upper House (Senate), which, in my mind, they bloody well should.

    When the Conservative Party of Canada ran in the last election, they had a simple plan: saying they would make the government more transparent, to remove it more out of the lives of Canadians. They got their items mixed up, because as it stands they just put the government more into my life, and made it that much harder to find out what’s going on. Go digging for information on this document and all you will find is PR spin from the government, and a whole lot of articles/blogs against it. Reporters who have tried under the Freedom of Information Act to get more information only get a title, with everything else blacked out. This, to me, is not a more transparent government - this is the exact opposite of what I was told.

    Don’t give me your stupid violent comments regarding this matter, give me your open discussion and your passions instead. Tell the masses in this country what is going on and let them know what their government plans for them without any support of the House of Commons. For once, I want to see my country's men and women use their voice to tell the government what they do not want.

    This isn’t hard to do, but it would take time and some effort.

  • Pass this article (or any others you find) onto your friends, family, co-workers, and teachers.

  • Email newspaper editors regarding this matter and ask them why they are not covering it at all, or not covering it more often.

  • Call local radio shows and bring it up with them. There's no better way to get the word out to a few hundred listeners.

  • Write letters to the following: the Prime Minister's Office, the Leader of the Opposition, your local MP, and Provincial MPs.


    • Yes, I said write letters, the ones you mail.

    Stop laughing.

    Done now?

    Good.

    Emails are nice and dandy, but letters are much harder to ignore. In this day and age of spam filters, and the ever-so-delicious delete key, it’s easy for someone to get rid of them. A few hundred emails are easy to get rid of, a few hundred paper letters, on the other hand, are not.

    To get you started and make things a little easier, here’s information on who to write to, some advice on writing a letter to an editor, and a good list of email addresses for newspaper editors. Also, here is information on how to find your local MP, and, last but not least, a good list of radio shows to call into.

    Truly, I only want one thing from those who read this ... to stand up and use what you were born with.

    Your freedom of speech.

    • PERMALINK
    • PRINT
    • Digg This
    • Email To A Friend
     

    Previous

    PAGE: 

    1 | 2

    Next

    Comments
    Lexiphanic

    Lexiphanic

    Australia
    August 2005

    JUN 01, 2008 10:17 AM

    It's outrageous!
    I have extensive travelling in my future (I'm talking possibly decades of global criss-crossing) -- the idea of having my electronics checked at every customs point is prohibitive to my travelling.

    What can we expect in the future? Body cavity searches for USB flash drives??

    SockPuppet

    SockPuppet

    I'm lost
    July 2006

    JUN 01, 2008 03:38 PM

    Lexiphanic said:
    It's outrageous!
    I have extensive travelling in my future (I'm talking possibly decades of global criss-crossing) -- the idea of having my electronics checked at every customs point is prohibitive to my travelling.

    What can we expect in the future? Body cavity searches for USB flash drives??



    Sooner or later, yes. As the interwebs become more and more vital to the global economy, it's going to become more and more difficult to resist cries of "Protect us!" from the financial institutions, and companies, and the average punter.

    xo_b_mac

    xo_b_mac

    Markham, ON
    June 2007

    JUN 01, 2008 03:56 PM

    Always trust some guy writing on a pron site to show me the truth. blackeyed

    AceT

    AceT

    Portland, OR
    April 2004

    JUN 01, 2008 04:30 PM

    There's been a lot of talk about people having their computers searched when traveling overseas. This isn't strictly a Canadian problem, many countries apparently go through your stuff and I've read more than one article from frequent travelers on how they combat this, the most common being using something like TrueCrypt to create a hidden volume with your actual drive contents.

    With that said, I've crossed the border into Canada nine times since November 2006, and never once have they searched any of my electronics, of which I carry a lot, and have stated as such. And it's worth noting this is a proposal, nothing that's in effect for Canadians just yet, but I do agree it's atrocious and should be fought against. The conservatives have really been doing a number on you guys lately.

    zenFish

    zenFish

    Vancouver, BC
    August 2004

    JUN 01, 2008 06:23 PM

    At the borders, from what I can find, they do a simple item. 1. Copy the data (meaning your hidden drives), or 2. take the laptop (meaning they will find it later).

    So far the only solution I have found is what most companies are doing, don't take ANY data, and download it over a SSH connection later on.

    You'd be w/out videos and music... but you'd be able to protect your banking data and passwords.

    More links below regarding this story, give a read, pass it on.

    Also, the countries that are going to be affected are listed in the article, but I'm sure they are trying to get more on board.

    Link First story I found on it, can't get the title as the server is 'too busy'.

    We Must act now against ACTA : Jamie.com

    US Plots Pirate Bay Killer : Slashdot.

    IPJustice : Acta

    ACTA Agreement : Excess Copyright

    ACTA : Slashdot

    Let's stand up to Big Brother : The Province (Vancouver)

    Globe and Mail

    Ottawa Citizen

    asbestosman

    asbestosman

    Australia
    October 2005

    JUN 01, 2008 06:33 PM

    I'm a big fan of NWO-oriented conspiracy paranoia. Zeitgeist type stuff. I don't really believe that the people at the top could organise a piss-up in a brewery, let alone the enslavement of the human race, but it keeps me afraid of things I think we should all be guarding against. Things like this.
    Multi-national, secretly formulated and implemented legislation that removes a few more of our liberties. Coming July.

    After the multi-lateral treaty's scope and priorities are negotiated by the few countries invited to participate in the early discussions, ACTA's text will be "locked" and other countries who are later "invited" to sign-on to the pact will not be able to re-negotiate its terms. It is claimed that signing-on to the trade agreement will be "voluntary", but few countries will have the muscle to refuse an "invitation" to join, once the rules have been set by the select few conducting the negotiations.



    Even if my own government doesn't sign up this time round, it's another bit of world-government legislation that may one day effect every single one of us.

    discombobulate

    discombobulate

    Australia
    June 2003

    JUN 01, 2008 07:25 PM

    Please, get real. In Australia at least, (and I'm sure post 9/11 in pretty much every country in the world) border officials already have the power to search through your luggage and examine mobile phones, computers, pdas, cameras, DVDs - any form media you chose to name, and they can probably look at it.

    It's how they nab people engaged in credit card skimming, child pornography, child sex tourism, terrorism, people smuggling, people trafficking, drug running, money laundering etc etc.

    Do you honestly think that any country is going to divert resources away from the prevention of the aforementioned crimes to check if a random punter has a stolen MP3 on their ipod? Do you honestly think that a government is going to resource border agencies to follow a treaty set out to do the bidding of big business, as opposed to their own legislation??

    LSlice

    LSlice

    Montclair, NJ
    December 2007

    JUN 01, 2008 07:32 PM

    asbestosman said:
    I'm a big fan of NWO-oriented conspiracy paranoia. Zeitgeist type stuff. I don't really believe that the people at the top could organise a piss-up in a brewery, let alone the enslavement of the human race, but it keeps me afraid of things I think we should all be guarding against. Things like this.
    Multi-national, secretly formulated and implemented legislation that removes a few more of our liberties. Coming July.

    After the multi-lateral treaty's scope and priorities are negotiated by the few countries invited to participate in the early discussions, ACTA's text will be "locked" and other countries who are later "invited" to sign-on to the pact will not be able to re-negotiate its terms. It is claimed that signing-on to the trade agreement will be "voluntary", but few countries will have the muscle to refuse an "invitation" to join, once the rules have been set by the select few conducting the negotiations.



    Even if my own government doesn't sign up this time round, it's another bit of world-government legislation that may one day effect every single one of us.



    on the NWO- there are certainly powerful people who like the idea of global governance, as they already see themselves as part of a global elite, moreso then citizens of specific countries.

    I think there is a conscious push towards that direction by various corporate and financial interests (some of which that yes, have been going on for a very long time, like David Rockefeller).

    The NWO is sort of a rorschach test, as different groups see it as different things, depending on their perspective.

    There is no intention of suddenly creating a literal one world government, and I don't believe in the Alex Jones "endgame" scenario, but there is a definte slow and incremental assualt on national soveriegnty, as institutions like the European Union, World Bank, IMF, WTO, and UN slowly gain significance and power.

    As far as the "planning" thing, it's not like there are people sitting in a smoke filled room slaughtering goats and sharing their illuminati decoder rings.

    It is more of a reaction to the current situation deal, with top down control of orginizations that help shape the policy and consensus of the world. Groups like the Tri-lateral commission, council on foreign relations, club of rome, project for the new american century, to name a few. Orgs with no real power, but the most important actual power, with is the power to create consensus amongst the elite.

    IDGAS

    IDGAS

    Portland, ME
    March 2004

    JUN 01, 2008 08:24 PM

    LSlice said:
    on the NWO- there are certainly powerful people who like the idea of global governance, as they already see themselves as part of a global elite, moreso then citizens of specific countries.

    I think there is a conscious push towards that direction by various corporate and financial interests (some of which that yes, have been going on for a very long time, like David Rockefeller).

    The NWO is sort of a rorschach test, as different groups see it as different things, depending on their perspective.

    There is no intention of suddenly creating a literal one world government, and I don't believe in the Alex Jones "endgame" scenario, but there is a definte slow and incremental assualt on national soveriegnty, as institutions like the European Union, World Bank, IMF, WTO, and UN slowly gain significance and power.

    As far as the "planning" thing, it's not like there are people sitting in a smoke filled room slaughtering goats and sharing their illuminati decoder rings.

    It is more of a reaction to the current situation deal, with top down control of orginizations that help shape the policy and consensus of the world. Groups like the Tri-lateral commission, council on foreign relations, club of rome, project for the new american century, to name a few. Orgs with no real power, but the most important actual power, with is the power to create consensus amongst the elite.



    CONGRATULATIONS lslice you are today's winner of the tin-foil hat award. Don't worry picking it up it. We will delivered to you in one of our new environment friendly hybrid black helicopters.

    CoyoteMike

    CoyoteMike

    Iowa City, IA
    May 2006

    JUN 01, 2008 08:30 PM

    IDGAS said:

    LSlice said:
    on the NWO- there are certainly powerful people who like the idea of global governance, as they already see themselves as part of a global elite, moreso then citizens of specific countries.

    I think there is a conscious push towards that direction by various corporate and financial interests (some of which that yes, have been going on for a very long time, like David Rockefeller).

    The NWO is sort of a rorschach test, as different groups see it as different things, depending on their perspective.

    There is no intention of suddenly creating a literal one world government, and I don't believe in the Alex Jones "endgame" scenario, but there is a definte slow and incremental assualt on national soveriegnty, as institutions like the European Union, World Bank, IMF, WTO, and UN slowly gain significance and power.

    As far as the "planning" thing, it's not like there are people sitting in a smoke filled room slaughtering goats and sharing their illuminati decoder rings.

    It is more of a reaction to the current situation deal, with top down control of orginizations that help shape the policy and consensus of the world. Groups like the Tri-lateral commission, council on foreign relations, club of rome, project for the new american century, to name a few. Orgs with no real power, but the most important actual power, with is the power to create consensus amongst the elite.



    CONGRATULATIONS lslice you are today's winner of the tin-foil hat award. Don't worry picking it up it. We will delivered to you in one of our new environment friendly hybrid black helicopters.



    I bet Tom Cruise is behind it all, somehow.

    zenFish

    zenFish

    Vancouver, BC
    August 2004

    JUN 01, 2008 09:08 PM

    discombobulate said:
    Please, get real. In Australia at least, (and I'm sure post 9/11 in pretty much every country in the world) border officials already have the power to search through your luggage and examine mobile phones, computers, pdas, cameras, DVDs - any form media you chose to name, and they can probably look at it.

    It's how they nab people engaged in credit card skimming, child pornography, child sex tourism, terrorism, people smuggling, people trafficking, drug running, money laundering etc etc.

    Do you honestly think that any country is going to divert resources away from the prevention of the aforementioned crimes to check if a random punter has a stolen MP3 on their ipod? Do you honestly think that a government is going to resource border agencies to follow a treaty set out to do the bidding of big business, as opposed to their own legislation??



    Do you want to hope that's the case? I would rather see some open discussion from my government on this matter, to ensure that I don't get searched just for some mp3s.

    Also, when searching for any sort of 'digital crime', I would like a guaranteed assurance, that if they do copy my data, they don't keep it for long.

    ie, transparency.

    IDGAS

    IDGAS

    Portland, ME
    March 2004

    JUN 01, 2008 09:20 PM

    Schneier on Security may well be the best blog on security and security technology. His May 16, 2008 post on Crossing Borders with Laptops and PDAs is quite relevant to this thread.

    Last month a US court ruled that border agents can search your laptop, or any other electronic device, when you're entering the country. They can take your computer and download its entire contents, or keep it for several days. Customs and Border Patrol has not published any rules regarding this practice...

    But the US is not alone. British customs agents search laptops for pornography. And there are reports on the internet of this sort of thing happening at other borders, too. You might not like it, but it's a fact. So how do you protect yourself?

    Encrypting your entire hard drive, something you should certainly do for security in case your computer is lost or stolen, won't work here. The border agent is likely to start this whole process with a "please type in your password". Of course you can refuse, but the agent can search you further, detain you longer, refuse you entry into the country and otherwise ruin your day.

    So your best defence is to clean up your laptop. A customs agent can't read what you don't have. You don't need five years' worth of email and client data. You don't need your old love letters and those photos (you know the ones I'm talking about). Delete everything you don't absolutely need. And use a secure file erasure program to do it. While you're at it, delete your browser's cookies, cache and browsing history. It's nobody's business what websites you've visited. And turn your computer off - don't just put it to sleep - before you go through customs; that deletes other things. Think of all this as the last thing to do before you stow your electronic devices for landing.

    If you can't, consider putting your sensitive data on a USB drive or even a camera memory card: even 16GB cards are reasonably priced these days. Encrypt it, of course, because it's easy to lose something that small. Slip it in your pocket, and it's likely to remain unnoticed even if the customs agent pokes through your laptop.



    If you do not add Schneier on Security to your daily blog reading list you are sacrificing knowledge for a bit of time.

    discombobulate

    discombobulate

    Australia
    June 2003

    JUN 01, 2008 09:26 PM

    zenFish said:

    Do you want to hope that's the case? I would rather see some open discussion from my government on this matter, to ensure that I don't get searched just for some mp3s.

    Also, when searching for any sort of 'digital crime', I would like a guaranteed assurance, that if they do copy my data, they don't keep it for long.

    ie, transparency.



    What do you suspect they are going to copy? your emails? go through your word documents and look at job applications? Or spreadsheets of your weekly budget? or perhaps they intend to compile the worlds largest collection of pornography.

    If you do get stopped, and searched, and they go through your stuff, chances are it's for a reason. Like they have a reasonable suspicion that you are involved in a crime. Border agencies never search people at random. So if you've ever been searched before, chances are you've ticked a box somewhere that makes them think you might be up to something. like how/when/where you purchased your tickets, or your intended address, or the country you've come from, or they way you interact with officials when being questioned.

    Governments are not going to copy and retain information that isn't directly relevant to an investigation. Think of the data storage alone - if they stopped 10 people a day, and dumped the contents of their electronic devices onto a hard drive. They would need massive amounts of data storage for very little possible benefit.

    At any rate, should your worst fears come true, and this treaty come into force, if you do have pirate software/music/movies etc, then chances are you've broken the law to obtain it. if you don't want to be searched, and have data copied and face penalties for breaching copyright, then dont download pirate material. or do those laws not apply to you??

    zenFish

    zenFish

    Vancouver, BC
    August 2004

    JUN 01, 2008 09:35 PM

    maybe you should see what is happening south of the border, before you tell me this is never a "random" search.

    Link

    Frankly I think it's a little on the sad side, that our governments aren't beefing up the border against say... illegal arms, or drugs.

    Not like that is a huge issue.

    discombobulate

    discombobulate

    Australia
    June 2003

    JUN 01, 2008 09:55 PM

    How does that link indicate that the searches were not targeted in some way?

    Your link is to a request about something that


    which, anecdotally, is happening more often



    and following the link in that article -


    "One member who responded to our survey said she has been waiting for a year to get her laptop and its contents back," said Susan Gurley, the group's executive director. "She said it was randomly seized. And since she hasn't been arrested, I assume she was just a regular business traveler, not a criminal."



    and this is from an article in 2006. Surely by now there would be some concrete statistics on the number of business execs who've had their laptop seized. Did they follow up with the mystery woman who waited a year?

    Anecdotal evidence and survey replies from 2006 are not strengthening your case.



    Frankly I think it's a little on the sad side, that our governments aren't beefing up the border against say... illegal arms, or drugs.



    that's the entire point of my post. No government has announced that they are making this law - the big entertainment companies are pushing for a treaty to protect their slice of pie, and they are trying to get governments to follow suit. This treaty is really pointless without the support of countries like India, China, Thailand etc - where counterfeiting on every level is rife.

    As the world's economies head into a downturn (or dare I say, recession) I cannot see any popular support from voters to any government that is going to refocus its border agencies from drugs/guns/terrorists/kiddy porn/ to the protection of the entertainment industry.

    In Australia at least, with compulsory voting, Governments may be in bed with big business, but they know that plans that are unpopular with the electorate often lead to their demise (see John Howard and Work Choices)

    Previous

    PAGE: 

    1 | 2

    Next

    featured interviews