ACTA – ‘The Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement’ is a proposed plurilateral agreement for the purpose of establishing international standards on intellectual property rights enforcement.

ACTA would establish a new international legal framework that would create its “own governing body outside existing international institutions” such as – the World Trade Organization (WTO), the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) or the United Nations.

An open letter signed by many organizations, including Consumers International, EDRi (27 European civil rights and privacy NGOs), the Free Software Foundation (FSF), the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), ASIC (French trade association for web 2.0 companies), and the Free Knowledge Institute (FKI), states that “the current draft of ACTA would profoundly restrict the fundamental rights and freedoms of European citizens, most notably the freedom of expression and communication privacy.”

[UPDATE] – It seems, SOPA and PIPA were just distractions! while they signed a copyright treaty “ACTA” behind the curtain…

US, Australia, Japan, Switzerland, and many EU nations have already signed this secret censorship pact last year in 2011.
The Recent country to join the list is – Poland.

Web link to original article.

Sheffield Hallam University undergraduate Richard O’Dwyer, 23, allegedly earned thousands of pounds through advertising on the TVShack website before it was closed down by the US authorities.

He faces jail if convicted of the allegations, which were brought following a crackdown by the US Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency.

His lawyer Ben Cooper has argued that the site did not store copyright material itself and merely pointed users to other sites, in the same way that Google and Yahoo operate.

Mr Cooper also claimed his client would be the first UK citizen to be extradited for such an offence and would effectively become a “guinea pig” for copyright law in the US.

His mother Julia O’Dwyer, from Chesterfield, has described the action as “beyond belief” and the UK’s extradition treaty with the US as “rotten.”

But District Judge Quentin Purdy today ruled at Westminster Magistrates’ Court that the extradition could go ahead.

Mr Cooper indicated he would appeal against the ruling.

The judge said: “There are said to be direct consequences of criminal activity by Richard O’Dwyer in the USA, albeit by him never leaving the north of England.

“Such a state of affairs does not demand a trial here if the competent UK authorities decline to act and does, in my judgment, permit one in the USA.”

He added: “I reject all challenges advanced to this request. No bars or other challenge being raised or found, I send the case to the Secretary of State.”

The court heard that O’Dwyer was arrested by police in November 2010 and two of his computers were seized.

In interviews, he is said to have accepted owning TVShack.net and TVShack.cc, earning approximately £15,000 per month from online advertisements hosted on those sites.

The judge said he was satisfied that the alleged conduct would constitute an offence in UK law.

He added that the prospect of a serious criminal trial was “obviously alarming” and went on: “Trial abroad in any foreign land is, plainly, even more daunting.

“However, enforcement of cross-border criminal justice is intended, in part at least, to ensure alleged victims of crime and the wider public confidence in criminal justice is not thwarted by national borders.”

O’Dwyer showed no emotion as the ruling was made.

His mother, Mrs O’Dwyer, criticised the UK’s extradition treaty with the US. Speaking outside the court, she said: “If they want to prosecute something they will. There’s no safeguards here for British citizens. How can the US government be allowed to ruin a young student’s life when similar cases brought in English courts show that what they allege is not illegal here?

“Both prosecution and defence counsels agreed in court that Richard had a strong argument to defeat the extradition request. We will look to appeal to a higher court without delay.”

She added: “I’m disappointed with this Government for signing us up to this treaty, which has opened the floodgates to America to come and seize British citizens without even having set foot out of this country.”

O’Dwyer added: “I am obviously disappointed with the judge’s decision today.” He said the website had “helped me no end with my studies” and said when he first set it up he “didn’t even think it would get that popular.”

Asked if websites that link to other sites should be open to prosecution, he replied: “I think you should ask Google the same question.”

The campaigning group Liberty later added to the pressure on the Government.

Co-ordinator Sabina Frediani said: “Everyone is vulnerable under the current rotten extradition regime – it takes key decisions out of the hands of British judges, leaving our children exposed to the injustice of instant extradition.”

Web link to original article.

Press TV said the move was politically motivated but regulator Ofcom denied it was acting at the British government’s behest and said the broadcaster had broken licensing rules.

Britain has been a focus of Iranian ire over steps to tighten sanctions over Iran’s disputed nuclear program.

Britain shut Iran’s embassy in London and expelled all its staff in November after its embassy in the Iranian capital Tehran was overrun by a crowd angry at British sanctions.

Ofcom said its decision was based on Press TV’s failure to declare that Tehran rather than London was its editorial base when it was granted the license.

Press TV is a 24-hour news channel owned by Iran’s state, available via satellite around the world and on the Internet.

Its English-language service was removed from Sky TV’s satellite platform on Friday as a result of the decision. It will still be available online.

Britain’s Foreign Office said it was not involved in the decision but had been concerned about allegations that Press TV had broadcast forced confessions from detainees.

Press TV said on its website the move was “a clear example of censorship.”

CRITICISM

The story led Press TV’s news bulletins where its reporter said the move appeared politically motivated, aimed at silencing a broadcaster that had focused in part on the failings of British domestic and foreign policy.

“Ofcom cannot claim that it is not a part of the British government … and it acts exactly in line with the policies of the British government. Otherwise, it would not be possible to prevent an international network and an alternative voice in Britain (from broadcasting),” Press TV’s newsroom director Hamidreza Emadi told state television.

“This action has not been successful in stopping the activities of Press TV. We have tested and come up with several ways to broadcast our programs for our viewers,” he added.

George Galloway, a former member of the British parliament who hosts a talk show on the channel, called Press TV a “voice for the voiceless … This is a blow for Press TV … but it is more of a blow to the British government’s hypocritical stance of being in favour of freedom of expression,” he said.

Ofcom, which is accountable to parliament, rejected the claim it was acting on behalf of the British government. “Ofcom’s decisions are made independently in accordance with its statutory powers and duties under the Communications Act 2003,” a spokeswoman for the regulator said.

The roots of the Ofcom decision lie in a ruling last month to fine Press TV 100,000 pounds ($155,000) for broadcasting an unauthorized interview with an imprisoned Newsweek journalist.

Ofcom said it emerged during that case that editorial control of Press TV was exercised from Tehran rather than London and the broadcaster had failed to amend its license accordingly.

Press TV was given a license on the basis it was run out of London. Foreign media groups can hold UK broadcast licenses but must be open about where editorial control is based.

Ofcom also said Press TV Limited had not paid the 100,000-pound fine and it would pursue that matter separately.

“We have been concerned for some time by serious allegations about Press TV, in particular that it has been involved in broadcasting confessions obtained under duress,” the Foreign Office said.

“It is right and proper that these allegations should have been investigated by Ofcom, as the independent regulator of the UK media. Ofcom is independent of the government. The government was not involved in this decision.”

Web link to original article.

But on the horizon looms threats of a different kind, the PIPA and SOPA bills.

While SOPA has been put on hold temporarily, the PIPA bill is going full steam ahead. If it passes, The Pirate Bay and other torrent sites may be the first to be targeted. Depending on the final text of the bills, these sites may be blocked by ISPs, censored by search engines, and in some cases they may even lose their domain names.

These developments cause some concern among the people running The Pirate Bay, but interestingly enough they don’t fear for themselves.

“Of course we’re worried. Not so much for The Pirate Bay, as there are many workarounds, but for democratic reasons,” a Pirate Bay insider told TorrentFreak.

Indeed, recent history has shown that no matter what technical measures are put in use to block The Pirate Bay, the site and its users find ways around it. Whether it’s a backup domain, alternative DNS-servers or proxy sites, PIPA and SOPA can be easily circumvented. In addition, the site’s advertising partners don’t fall within reach of the US Government.

Anticipating future censorship, The Pirate Bay yesterday released a modified version of the CGIPROXY software so anyone with access to a webserver can easily start their own Pirate Bay proxy. And since The Pirate Bay plans to ditch .torrent filescompletely, the resources that have to be invested are minimal.

For opponents of the PIPA and SOPA bills, The Pirate Bay’s stance is yet even more ammunition to get the pending legislation thrown out completely. When even the biggest target isn’t worried at all, why put the future of the Internet at risk?

The Pirate Bay itself is amazed by the unprecedented power the entertainment industry has in Washington.

“It’s crazy what politicians will do in the name of copyright! They are either totally paid off, stupid or copyright holders. Or all of them – that’s not as uncommon as you might think. The worst part is that it’s so obvious that pretty much everyone in and outside the US, including major corporations, are against this bill,” the Pirate Bay insider said.

“The minority will now decide to get to control the majority, for reasons that only help the minority and not society as a whole. It’s disgusting. If the law was discussed in Iran or China, we might understand it – and criticize it just as much. But this… come on!”

The Pirate Bay urges the International community to take a clear stand in the issue, preventing the US from taking control of the Internet. The European Parliament set the first step in this direction recently, by condemning domain name seizures, but there is still a long way to go according to The Pirate Bay.

“It’s obvious that the US has too much influence on the internet and the world’s politics. SOPA/PIPA is one of many newer laws that is passed in the US but really is in effect outside of their borders. The UN and other bodies should actually fight back and say that this is not OK, ” the insider said.

“The internet is a global infrastructure and can’t be run in one single country. Besides fighting SOPA, we must also take away the possibility for a single country to rule over the global infrastructure.”

For now, however, the battle is far from over. SOPA can be revived any minute and PIPA is still very much alive and up for vote in Congress next week. As a protest, many websites large and small will go on strike tomorrow, but not The Pirate Bay, for the torrent site it’s business as usual.

Source: The Pirate Bay: PIPA/SOPA Won’t Stop Us!

UN crime chief says drug money flowed into banks Jan 25, 2009
(Reuters) – The United Nations’ crime and drug watchdog has indications that money made in illicit drug trade has been used to keep banks afloat in the global financial crisis, its head was quoted as saying on Sunday.

Vienna-based UNODC Executive Director Antonio Maria Costa said in an interview released by Austrian weekly Profil that drug money often became the only available capital when the crisis spiralled out of control last year.

“In many instances, drug money is currently the only liquid investment capital,” Costa was quoted as saying by Profil. “In the second half of 2008, liquidity was the banking system’s main problem and hence liquid capital became an important factor.”

The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime had found evidence that “interbank loans were funded by money that originated from drug trade and other illegal activities,” Costa was quoted as saying. There were “signs that some banks were rescued in that way.”

Profil said Costa declined to identify countries or banks which may have received drug money and gave no indication how much cash might be involved. He only said Austria was not on top of his list, Profil said. (Reporting by Boris Groendahl; Editing by Charles Dick)

Article fromwww.guardian.co.uk

Drug money saved banks in global crisis, claims UN advisor 13 December 2009

Drugs and crime chief says $352bn in criminal proceeds was effectively laundered by financial institutions

Drugs money worth billions of dollars kept the financial system afloat at the height of the global crisis, the United Nations’ drugs and crime tsar has told the Observer.

Antonio Maria Costa, head of the UN Office on Drugs and Crime, said he has seen evidence that the proceeds of organised crime were “the only liquid investment capital” available to some banks on the brink of collapse last year. He said that a majority of the $352bn (£216bn) of drugs profits was absorbed into the economic system as a result.

This will raise questions about crime’s influence on the economic system at times of crisis. It will also prompt further examination of the banking sector as world leaders, including Barack Obama and Gordon Brown, call for new International Monetary Fund regulations. Speaking from his office in Vienna, Costa said evidence that illegal money was being absorbed into the financial system was first drawn to his attention by intelligence agencies and prosecutors around 18 months ago. “In many instances, the money from drugs was the only liquid investment capital. In the second half of 2008, liquidity was the banking system’s main problem and hence liquid capital became an important factor,” he said.

Some of the evidence put before his office indicated that gang money was used to save some banks from collapse when lending seized up, he said.

“Inter-bank loans were funded by money that originated from the drugs trade and other illegal activities… There were signs that some banks were rescued that way.” Costa declined to identify countries or banks that may have received any drugs money, saying that would be inappropriate because his office is supposed to address the problem, not apportion blame. But he said the money is now a part of the official system and had been effectively laundered.

“That was the moment [last year] when the system was basically paralysed because of the unwillingness of banks to lend money to one another. The progressive liquidisation to the system and the progressive improvement by some banks of their share values [has meant that] the problem [of illegal money] has become much less serious than it was,” he said.

The IMF estimated that large US and European banks lost more than $1tn on toxic assets and from bad loans from January 2007 to September 2009 and more than 200 mortgage lenders went bankrupt. Many major institutions either failed, were acquired under duress, or were subject to government takeover.

Gangs are now believed to make most of their profits from the drugs trade and are estimated to be worth £352bn, the UN says. They have traditionally kept proceeds in cash or moved it offshore to hide it from the authorities. It is understood that evidence that drug money has flowed into banks came from officials in Britain, Switzerland, Italy and the US.

British bankers would want to see any evidence that Costa has to back his claims. A British Bankers’ Association spokesman said: “We have not been party to any regulatory dialogue that would support a theory of this kind. There was clearly a lack of liquidity in the system and to a large degree this was filled by the intervention of central banks.”
Alex Jones Peter Schiff Max Keiser Webster Tarpley Gerald Celente

Web link to original article.

Ahmadinejad’s visit to Caracas kicked off a four-nation tour that is also to include Nicaragua, Cuba and Ecuador.

“Despite the arrogant people who do not wish us to be together, we will unite forever,” the Iranian president told his Venezuelan counterpart.

The visit to Latin America comes after the US imposed a new, tougher round of sanctions against Iran over its nuclear activities. Tehran is anticipating any further sanctions by threatening to block the Strait of Hormuz, a crucial oil transit route.

Adding to the tensions, Iran announced Monday that it had sentenced US-Iranian citizen Amir Mirzaei Hekmati to death after convicting him of working for the CIA, an allegation the US government denies.

“The imperialist madness has been unleashed in a way that has not been seen for a long time,” Chavez said in a ceremony welcoming Ahmadinejad at his presidential palace in Caracas.

Some analysts believe the trip is a move by Iran to shore up support with anti-American powers ahead of a possible military confrontation with the West over its nuclear program. Western powers, led by the US, allege that Iran is developing atomic weapons, a charge that has yet to be proven.

Political analyst Eva Golinger told RT that Ahmadinejad is consolidating ties with Latin American countries with which Iran already has political and economic relationships.

However, Golinger expressed doubts that Tehran and Caracas are forging an “evil anti-American relationship.” “We have to tone down a little bit the exaggeration that there is some kind of plot going on here and look at the facts – these are legitimate sovereign relationships.”

Washington nevertheless does not want to see any adversaries getting closer to a region it traditionally considers to be its “backyard,” she noted. “Washington sees the relationships in Latin America that have been growing with China and Russia as a threat.”

Joel Rubin, the Director of Policy and Government Affairs at the Ploughshares Fund, believes that Ahmadinejad’s trip is a move to break out of the isolation other nations have forced upon Iran.

“Ahmadinejad is looking for friends wherever he can find them. He needs votes at the United Nations to block future sanctions,” he told RT.

“He also needs potential markets for commerce when the rest of the world looks to be moving towards a more sanctions-oriented position.”

Web link to original article.

According to the academician, that explains why President Mikhail Saakashvili is roaming the republic opening new hospitals in its regions.

“These are 20-bed hospitals…It’s an American project. A big war between the US and Iran is beginning in the Persian Gulf. $5 billion was allocated for the construction of these 20-bed military hospitals,” Javelidze said in an interview with Georgian paper Kviris Kronika (News of the Week), as cited by Newsgeorgia website.

The opposition member stated that the construction is mainly paid from the American pocket.

In addition, airports are being briskly built in Georgia and there are talks of constructing a port for underwater vessels in Kulevi on the eastern Black Sea coast in Georgia.

Javelidze believes that it is all linked to the deployment of US military bases on the Georgian soil. Lazika – one of Saakashvili’s mega-projects, a new city that will be built from a scratch – will be “an American military town”. According to the politician, “a secret airdrome” has already been erected in the town of Marneuli, southern Georgia.

The opposition member wondered who would protect Georgia in case if Iran fires its missiles against US military facilities on the territory of the Caucasian state.

All in all, about 30 new hospitals and medical centers were opened in the former Soviet republic in December last year. The plan is to build over a hundred more.

As for Lazika, the Georgian president announced his ambitious idea to build a second-largest city in Georgia, its western economic and trade center, at the end of 2011. According to the plan – which was slammed by his opponents and many analysts – Saakashvili’s dream-town will become home to at least half a million people within a decade.

Web link to original article.

Web link to the original article.