Не можам да го поткрепам ова со линк, но читав пред извесно време дека поединец бил тужен од музичка компанија затоа што снимил домашно видео на youtube, за време на кое на телевизорот во дневната одела нивна песна.
За жал, да, тоа е предвидено со ACTA, можеби нема да ти го исклучат Интернетот и можеби нема да те тужат, бидејќи сепак станува збор за приватна фотографија, но најсигурно ќе те опоменат, па ако и во иднина повторно ја закачиш истата таа фотографија на Интернет или некоја друга, но со брендирани предмети прикажани на истата, најверојатно ќе преминат и кон исклучување на Интернетот и тужба.
И додека Шведска ги лишува од слобода основачите на The Pirate Bay, нивната креација The Pirate Bay не само што и понатаму постои и успешно функционира, туку и веќе ги ужива довербата и поддршката на еден од најпознатите писатели на денешницата, Паоло Коелјо, кој ги охрабрува неговите читатели да ги симнат неговите книги бесплатно преку Интернет, а доколку уживаат во истите, да купат и легални печатени копии од истите, за да така докажат дека лакомоста на авторите не води никаде.
Е ова навистина ме изненади, автор на книги, кој нема ништо против тоа неговите авторски права да бидат прекршувани од трети лица, додека западот планира цензурирање на Интернетот, секоја му чест на Паоло Коелјо.
И да го затвори и форумот, патем.
И тоа, да.
a bogami i treba za americkite ped**i Pirate bay is downА после ова, Анонимус почна да ги руши сајтовите на европските влади... vlada.cz, http://italia.gov.it, osa.cz и тн...
aj be ti ne kazuj mnogu nekoj moze nema pari za kino kako konkreten primer go zemav ova!!!!
Во Бугарија, Интернет провајдерите се жалат бидејќи ACTA ќе им го поремети бизнисот.Kader Arif, the lead Acta negotiator in the European Parliament, says Acta potentially cuts access to lifesaving generic drugs and restricts online freedom
Charles Arthur
guardian.co.uk,Wednesday 1 February 2012 14.39 GMT
Article history
French MEP Kader Arif says Acta threatens online freedom and access to the use of generic versions of drugs for treating illnesses. Photograph: Lionel Bonaventure/AFP
The French MEP who resigned his position in charge of negotiating the international Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (Acta) has said it "goes too far" by potentially cutting access to lifesaving generic drugs and restricting internet freedom.
In an exclusive interview with the Guardian, Kader Arif – a member of the European parliament's international trade group, who was the lead negotiator over Acta – said that despite talks over the agreement having begun in 2007, "the European parliament, which represents the rights of the people, had no access to this mandate, neither had it information of the position defended by the commission or the demands of the other parties to the agreement".
Arif resigned in protest on 26 January as the EU signed the treaty, saying that he wished to "denounce in the strongest manner the process that led to the signing of this agreement: no association of civil society [and] lack of transparency from the beginning".
He said that it now threatens online freedom, access to the use of generic versions of drugs for treating illnesses, and could potentially mean that someone crossing a border who has a single song or film on their computer could face criminal charges.
Asked what he thought European citizens should do, Mr Arif said: "Showing that there is interest and concern about this agreement is the best way of creating a real public debate, which was never possible until now because of the lack of transparency on this dossier. Especially if the timeframe is short, raising awareness of members of parliament will be crucial. And because Acta is a mixed agreement, it will have to be ratified both by the European parliament and by every member state of the union, so there is also an opportunity to organise debates at the national level."
He says that it is now impossible to renegotiate the agreement because the 11 key parties to it concluded their discussions on 1 October 2011: "the European commission negotiated it on behalf of the EU, on the basis of a mandate given by the member states in 2007."
That means, he says, that "at this stage one can only accept or reject the agreement – no change of the text is possible. If the right wing of the European parliament had not imposed such a tight calendar, the members of the European parliament could have drafted an interim report, which would have put conditionalities to the ratification of the agreement, by giving recommendations to the commission and member states on how to implement it. But this is no longer a feasible option."
"The title of this agreement is misleading, because it's not only about counterfeiting, it's about the violation of intellectual property rights," he told the Guardian. "There is a major difference between these two concepts."
Acta has triggered public protests in a number of European and other countries, as well as online attacks by the hacking collective Anonymous. The US, EU member states, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, Japan and a number of other countries have signed it, although none has yet ratified it in national legislation.
The agreement would create an international framework and set of standards for a voluntary legal regime to enforce intellectual property rights across national boundaries.
Arif said one example illustrates this difference particularly well – the case of generic medicines. "Generic medicines are not counterfeited medicines; they are not the fake version of a drug; they are a generic version of a drug, produced either because the patent on the original drug has expired, or because a country has to put in place public health policies," he said.
A number of countries such as India and African nations have sought to use generic versions of drugs for infections such as HIV, which has often been resisted by pharmaceutical companies. Under Acta, Arif fears such countries would not have the same freedom to determine their own actions.
"There are international agreements, such as the Trips agreement, which foresees this last possibility," he said. "They're particularly important for developing countries which cannot afford to pay for patented HIV drugs, for example.
"The problem with Acta is that, by focusing on the fight against violation of intellectual property rights in general, it treats a generic drug just as a counterfeited drug. This means the patent holder can stop the shipping of the drugs to a developing country, seize the cargo and even order the destruction of the drugs as a preventive measure."
He thinks that is a key flaw: "Acta also limits the flexibilities listed in the Trips agreements to support developing countries in need of generic drugs. When the question of finding the right equilibrium between protection of intellectual property rights and protection of final users is so crucial, Acta appears to be very unbalanced in favour of patent holders. This is one of the major problems with the agreement."
Internet freedoms could also be under threat if Acta is ratified in its present form, he says. "The chapter on internet is particularly worrying as some experts consider it reintroduces the concept of liability of internet providers, which is clearly excluded in the European legislation." That could make ISPs, who provide internet access, liable for users' illicit file-sharing.
Arif also expressed concern that there could be more intrusive checks at borders to fight counterfeiting.
"I see a great risk concerning checks at borders, and the agreement foresees criminal sanctions against people using counterfeited products as a commercial activity," he said.
"This is relevant for the trade of fake shoes or bags for example, but what about data downloaded from the internet? If a customs officer considers that you may set up a commercial activity just by having one movie or one song on your computer, which is true in theory, you could face criminal sanctions.
"I don't want people to have their laptops or MP3 players searched at borders, there needs to be a clearer distinction between normal citizens and counterfeiters which trade fake products as a commercial activity. Acta goes too far."
The text of the finalised treaty (PDF) has now been made public, and the European commission has begun to try to explain how Acta would work. It has also published a document called 10 Myths about Acta, asserting that the public was informed "since the launch of the negotiations"; that it is drafted "in very flexible terms" and that "safeguards and exceptions under EU law or under the Trips agreement remain fully preserved".
It also insists that "Acta is about tackling large-scale illegal activity … there is a provision on Acta specifically exempting travellers from checks if the infringing goods are of a non-commercial nature and not part of large-scale trafficking".
Protesters rally during a demonstration against the ratifying of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA), in Warsaw, Poland, 27 January 2012. EPA/BGNES
The ACTA agreement will breach users' rights and change the course of internet evolution, argued a branch union of Bulgarian ISPs Wednesday.
"ACTA aims at obliterating anonymity and entirely transform the structure of the global network," said the Bulgarian Union of Independent Internet Providers.
In addition, Bulgarian ISPs argue that the agreement will breach privacy of users and will go as far as reverse the presumption of innocence.
Last Thursday, Bulgaria became one of 21 EU member states who joined countries such as the USA, Japan, Canada, Australia, South Korea and Switzerland as signatories to the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement.
The intergovernmental treaty stipulates that downloading content such as music and movies from sites not sanctioned by rights owners, such as torrent trackers, is similar to product counterfeiting.
ACTA further will have such actions be subjected to criminal, and not civil proceedings, as has been up to now.
The document has been drafted and signed under much secrecy, which has added to the ire of users worldwide.
"With the introduction of ACTA, ISPs will be obliged to survey their users' traffic and to give to the authorities information about who does what," said Bulgarian Union of Independent Internet Providers representative Strahil Dobrev.
"At the present moment, only the police, by means of a court decision, can make us do that. This will be totally changed if ACTA is implemented," clarified Dobrev.
ISPs argued that this could lead not only to breach of privacy rights, but also for random but significant punishments for users for downloading content as harmless as pictures.
So 15000 plata kako ke zemes licenciran windows od 10000 a i plus rar,office,nero i so uste ne.Za firmite dobro vo red e toa treba da imaat licenci ama za obicen korisnik...NO COMMENT
Очигледно погрешно сум се информирал кога во пост #16 од оваа тема на форумов сум објавил дека Нинтендо, Сони и Електроник Артс отворено излегле против SOPA.
Интернетот е дефинитивно една од најдобрите работи кои му се имаат случено на човештвото, давајќи му слобода да прави нешта. Но, со обиди за донесување на акти и закони како SOPA и PIPA, под превезот на интелектуалната сопственост, владите се обидуваат да ја одземат оваа слобода и да се стекнат со право да гасат цели сајтови без никакво предупредување и да праќаат луѓе во затвор поради споделување на фотографија или видео.
Иако 90% од големите американски компании се спротиставуваат на SOPA и PIPA велејќи дека тие би ја убиле онлајн слободата, сепак 10% од компаниите им даваат поддршка. Кои компании се најголемите поддржувачи?
10. Philip Morris International
Водечкиот американски производител на цигари кој е во сопственост на Altria Group.
9. Rolex Watch USA Inc
Rolex е производителот на најлуксузните часовници на светот.
8. Dolce & Gabbana USA, INC
SOPA ја поддржува и американската подружница на луксузната италијанска модна куќа
7. ADIDAS America
Уште еден производител на облека
6. U.S. Chamber of Commerce
Една од најголемите лоби групи во САД која „не е поврзана со американската влада“, а се состои од лобисти, адвокати и специјалисти за политики.
5. Ford Motor Company
Американската подружница на автомобилскиот производител за кој не треба претставување.
4. Sony
Sony Electronics, Sony Entertainment и Sony Pictures, заедно познати како Sony Inc.
3. Wal-Mart
Најголемиот ланец на американски дисконти. Mногумина се прашуваат каква врска има онлајн пиратеријата со бизнис со маркети?
2. World Wrestling Entertainment, Inc
Најголемата франшиза за боречки спортови во САД со милиони гледачи. Уште една компанија за која никој не знае зошто е толку загрижен а за пиратеријата.
1. Electronic Arts, Inc
Едниот од најголемите призводители на видео игри ги поддржува SOPA/PIPA, додека повеќето производители на видео игри не ја дадоа својата поддршка.
Треба некако и од некаде да се надомести за претрпените финансиски загуби.
Интересна работа, од 10-те најголеми поддржувачи на SOPA и PIPA, а најверојатно и на ACTA и TPP, само 2 (ДВЕ) фирми се дел од забавната индустрија и од информатичката технологија, а тоа се Електроник Артс и Сони.While the rest of the Internet community took to staging blackouts and voicing their protests against the Stop Online Piracy Act and the Protect IP Act, the main video game trade organization has supported the bills. It was only after SOPA and PIPA was shelved did the Entertainment Software Association withdraw its support for the controversial anti-piracy bills after widespread condemnation.
Although most major games companies are members of ESA, individual members including Microsoft, Nintendo and Sony have pulled their support from SOPA. Games consumers and developers have been vocal about their opposition to the proposed bills and ESA support has rankled. Some consumers have even called for boycotts of the ESA annual trade event, E3.
"From the beginning, ESA has been committed to the passage of balanced legislation to address the illegal theft of intellectual property found on foreign rogue sites," said the ESA in a statement. "Although the need to address this pervasive threat to our industry's creative investment remains, concerns have been expressed about unintended consequences stemming from the current legislative proposals. Accordingly, we call upon Congress, the Obama Administration, and stakeholders to refocus their energies on producing a solution that effectively balances both creative and technology interests."
ESA's last minute withdrawal of support notwithstanding, the gaming industry has been firmly against SOPA and its sister bill PIPA. This stance may strike the inexperienced observer as illogical given that the bill would actually protect the game companies' main product but this isn't actually the case. In fact Rovio CEO Mikael Hed told the Midem conference in Cannes that "Piracy may not be a bad thing."
According to Hed piracy could actually get companies more business. He explained that game companies should learn from the music industry and how it tried to combat piracy. While Rovio has merchandise pirated around the world especially in Asia, the company only pursues pirated product that hurts the Angry Birds brand through quality or pricing.
"We took something from the music industry, which was to stop treating the customers as users, and start treating them as fans," he said. "If we lose that fanbase, our business is done, but if we can grow that fanbase, our business will grow."
Rovio's CEO makes a strong point. The Internet has made it possible to share content in new and interesting ways where games actually benefit from interactions between gamers. Consumers share user made content for games like the Sims or Skyrim which in turn pushes sales. Piracy could also save software. Software pirates have saved older games from being lost in the data ether. Software can decay in a matter of years. CDs can get too scratched to function properly. Games published on ROM cartridges are getting harder to find and it's only through the efforts of digital pirates that these games have found new life in emulators.
Beyond saving games one other argument for piracy is that online pirates aren't actually eating into the game companies profits. People are pirating games, TV shows and movies right now but it hasn't cut into the movie, television and gaming industries billion dollar revenues. The fact is people who pirate content aren't really going to buy it in the first place. They pirate content that they're just trying out like games or TV shows. People who are legitimately interested in a game will go out and buy it, casual gamers who aren't sure if they want to pay $50 for a game will go online to get for free. Only a small portion would actually pirate content they want to watch.
To contact the editor, e-mail: editor@ibtimes.com
Очигледно погрешно сум се информирал кога во пост #16 од темата SOPA - Stop Online Piracy Act - предвесник за цензура на Интернетот ? сум објавил дека Нинтендо, Сони и Електроник Артс отворено излегле против SOPA.
Интернетот е дефинитивно една од најдобрите работи кои му се имаат случено на човештвото, давајќи му слобода да прави нешта. Но, со обиди за донесување на акти и закони како SOPA и PIPA, под превезот на интелектуалната сопственост, владите се обидуваат да ја одземат оваа слобода и да се стекнат со право да гасат цели сајтови без никакво предупредување и да праќаат луѓе во затвор поради споделување на фотографија или видео.
Иако 90% од големите американски компании се спротиставуваат на SOPA и PIPA велејќи дека тие би ја убиле онлајн слободата, сепак 10% од компаниите им даваат поддршка. Кои компании се најголемите поддржувачи?
10. Philip Morris International
Водечкиот американски производител на цигари кој е во сопственост на Altria Group.
9. Rolex Watch USA Inc
Rolex е производителот на најлуксузните часовници на светот.
8. Dolce & Gabbana USA, INC
SOPA ја поддржува и американската подружница на луксузната италијанска модна куќа
7. ADIDAS America
Уште еден производител на облека
6. U.S. Chamber of Commerce
Една од најголемите лоби групи во САД која „не е поврзана со американската влада“, а се состои од лобисти, адвокати и специјалисти за политики.
5. Ford Motor Company
Американската подружница на автомобилскиот производител за кој не треба претставување.
4. Sony
Sony Electronics, Sony Entertainment и Sony Pictures, заедно познати како Sony Inc.
3. Wal-Mart
Најголемиот ланец на американски дисконти. Mногумина се прашуваат каква врска има онлајн пиратеријата со бизнис со маркети?
2. World Wrestling Entertainment, Inc
Најголемата франшиза за боречки спортови во САД со милиони гледачи. Уште една компанија за која никој не знае зошто е толку загрижен а за пиратеријата.
1. Electronic Arts, Inc
Едниот од најголемите призводители на видео игри ги поддржува SOPA/PIPA, додека повеќето производители на видео игри не ја дадоа својата поддршка.
Треба некако и од некаде да се надомести за претрпените финансиски загуби.
Интересна работа, од 10-те најголеми поддржувачи на SOPA и PIPA, а најверојатно и на ACTA и TPP, само 2 (ДВЕ) фирми се дел од забавната индустрија и од информатичката технологија, а тоа се Електроник Артс и Сони.While the rest of the Internet community took to staging blackouts and voicing their protests against the Stop Online Piracy Act and the Protect IP Act, the main video game trade organization has supported the bills. It was only after SOPA and PIPA was shelved did the Entertainment Software Association withdraw its support for the controversial anti-piracy bills after widespread condemnation.
Although most major games companies are members of ESA, individual members including Microsoft, Nintendo and Sony have pulled their support from SOPA. Games consumers and developers have been vocal about their opposition to the proposed bills and ESA support has rankled. Some consumers have even called for boycotts of the ESA annual trade event, E3.
"From the beginning, ESA has been committed to the passage of balanced legislation to address the illegal theft of intellectual property found on foreign rogue sites," said the ESA in a statement. "Although the need to address this pervasive threat to our industry's creative investment remains, concerns have been expressed about unintended consequences stemming from the current legislative proposals. Accordingly, we call upon Congress, the Obama Administration, and stakeholders to refocus their energies on producing a solution that effectively balances both creative and technology interests."
ESA's last minute withdrawal of support notwithstanding, the gaming industry has been firmly against SOPA and its sister bill PIPA. This stance may strike the inexperienced observer as illogical given that the bill would actually protect the game companies' main product but this isn't actually the case. In fact Rovio CEO Mikael Hed told the Midem conference in Cannes that "Piracy may not be a bad thing."
According to Hed piracy could actually get companies more business. He explained that game companies should learn from the music industry and how it tried to combat piracy. While Rovio has merchandise pirated around the world especially in Asia, the company only pursues pirated product that hurts the Angry Birds brand through quality or pricing.
"We took something from the music industry, which was to stop treating the customers as users, and start treating them as fans," he said. "If we lose that fanbase, our business is done, but if we can grow that fanbase, our business will grow."
Rovio's CEO makes a strong point. The Internet has made it possible to share content in new and interesting ways where games actually benefit from interactions between gamers. Consumers share user made content for games like the Sims or Skyrim which in turn pushes sales. Piracy could also save software. Software pirates have saved older games from being lost in the data ether. Software can decay in a matter of years. CDs can get too scratched to function properly. Games published on ROM cartridges are getting harder to find and it's only through the efforts of digital pirates that these games have found new life in emulators.
Beyond saving games one other argument for piracy is that online pirates aren't actually eating into the game companies profits. People are pirating games, TV shows and movies right now but it hasn't cut into the movie, television and gaming industries billion dollar revenues. The fact is people who pirate content aren't really going to buy it in the first place. They pirate content that they're just trying out like games or TV shows. People who are legitimately interested in a game will go out and buy it, casual gamers who aren't sure if they want to pay $50 for a game will go online to get for free. Only a small portion would actually pirate content they want to watch.
To contact the editor, e-mail: editor@ibtimes.com
