"Obama Signs Global Internet Treaty Worse Than SOPA"
The Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement was signed by Obama on October 1 2011, yet is currently the subject of a White House petition demanding Senators be forced to ratify the treaty. The White House has circumvented the necessity to have the treaty confirmed by lawmakers by presenting it an as “executive agreement,” although legal scholars have highlighted the dubious nature of this characterization.
A treaty Obama labels an "executive agreement" and he want's to force Senators to ratify? Huh?
Under the provisions of ACTA, copyright holders will be granted sweeping direct powers to demand ISPs remove material from the Internet on a whim. Whereas ISPs normally are only forced to remove content after a court order, all legal oversight will be abolished, a precedent that will apply globally, rendering the treaty worse in its potential scope for abuse than SOPA or PIPA.
How long before foreign liberal groups shut down every website they disagree with? It reminds me of Natalee's case where pro-JVDS supporters tried to shut down every blog and news media that supported her family in the search for answers and their daughter.
What happens when on a whim, others shut down your free speech?
“That said, even if Obama has declared ACTA an executive agreement (while those in Europe insist that it’s a binding treaty), there is a very real Constitutional question here: can it actually be an executive agreement?” asks TechDirt. “The law is clear that the only things that can be covered by executive agreements are things that involve items that are solely under the President’s mandate. That is, you can’t sign an executive agreement that impacts the things Congress has control over. But here’s the thing: intellectual property, in Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution, is an issue given to Congress, not the President. Thus, there’s a pretty strong argument that the president legally cannot sign any intellectual property agreements as an executive agreement and, instead, must submit them to the Senate.”.
I still haven't seen any benefit for Americans. Just a lot of negatives.
Folks can get welfare without providing a Social Security number, they get foreign dependents on the taxes without a Social Security number, they can vote without a photo ID.
However, we're poised to create a system where everyone gets an internet ID?
Maybe all those internet IDs will vote some day? Apply for welfare? Take the place of living breathing people? Drain the 'safety' net?
Who's looking out for real people? Taxpayers? Citizens?
Another con job?
just my humble opinions
