Fiontan O’Ceallachain
Staff Writer
“Liberty means responsibility. That is why most men dread it.”
– George Bernard Shaw
Over the past 5 years there has been a hard push from mainly right leaning politicians to implement Internet regulating legislation. The majority of this legislation is officially designed to tackle on-line piracy and/or the on-line trade of counterfeit goods.
First thing is first, the majority of civilians, organisations and politicians who protest this legislation are not inspired by paranoia nor a desire to protect piracy. They do so out of a rational concern that some politicians – who are mostly backed by powerful international copyright corporations – wish to implement legislation which seriously threatens our freedom of speech and our right to privacy. The protest is an expression of our fundamental believe that we as a society cannot sacrifice our freedom of speech and right to privacy for the sake of an industry, or for so called ‘national security’.
Among the most immediate of these threats is ACTA. ACTA is a treaty, or international law, which proposes to tackle on-line piracy and the on-line trade of counterfeit goods by holding ISPs (Internet Service Providers) liable. This forces ISPs to monitor the on-line lives of customers, reporting every instance of copyright infringement. We live in the information age, it has liberated us in countless ways, we effectively think through the information medium – the Internet. Anything you are interested in – be it Gandhi, Godard or Gillespie – there is a significant chance you will have expressed these interests – a part of your being – through the Internet. Perhaps you investigated these interests through Google, Wikipedia or Youtube; perhaps you simply expressed your views through blogs, Twitters or Facebooks.
I ask you this: is it right to have a private police force monitoring this on-line existence? Most people respond with a certain no, yet far too few seems to realise how immediate this seemingly impossible threat is.
Firstly it is worth noting that there are different kinds of people protesting ACTA, a distinction few have recognised. This distinction is perhaps of a more intellectual nature and so difficult to identify, although I believe an understanding is crucial for those passively or actively interested in the movement.
ACTA and its sisters are serious threats to the liberal and democratic society mankind has dreamt of for millennia. Many people have have given their lives to protect a free society or condemn a broken one, and these threats are an insult of massive proportions to honest martyrs, us citizens and our future children, and it becomes all the more hurtful to empower the same threats for the sake of a commercial industry. It is natural that many people who realise this feel passionately about protesting it. The danger is when people let their passion consume them.
I had at one stage entertained the idea of attending Dublin’s anti-ACTA marches but I soon noticed a worrying trend. Photos of the march showed some (but by no means all and I want to make that clear) bearing crude signs and intimidating masks – I imagined this would do more harm than good. It is necessary that the public are welcomed into the discussion, not scared by an angry mob of youngsters. This passionate naivety was reflected in many of the comments left on the march’s on-line discussion space. I also understand that a portion of the march leaders are of a similar nature and even inconsistent in their beliefs by supporting Nick Griffin’s censorship from speaking at the Phil.
In addition to this, the Guy Fawkes masks, that have become a symbol of protest against Internet regulating legislation, are a perverted misrepresentation of the reality of the protest – people need to be especially careful here. Guy Fawkes was by definition a failed terrorist who lived at the turn of the 16th century. Guy Fawkes protested by trying to blow up the English Parliament – even the film ‘V for Vendetta’, from which the mask is taken, showed Guy Fawkes kill and cause killing. History has shown that aggressive protesting can never truly work, yet peaceful and respectful protesting has resulted in a wave of liberation – one only has to consider the last hundred years of mankind’s great story to realise this truth. The whimsical irony is that for every Guy Fawkes mask bought Warner Brothers make profit.
Another worry is the ‘hacktivist’ group known as Anonymous. Similarly, Anonymous use aggression and intimidation to protest. They seem to have kicked up quite a following, but I would like to see people protest their methods. They have a great talent that could make a massive difference to this struggle if used cleverly, yet it is trapped by naivety.
Unfortunately these groups seem to represent the protest within the mainstream media. I think it is difficult for people to become sure of their beliefs and to act in the middle of this mess.
There are four things I would like students to do:
1) Educate themselves on these issues.
2) Let their public representatives now they believe these legislations threatens their freedom of speech and right to privacy.
3) Keep up to date on the issue and don’t rely on the mainstream media.
4) Let their family and friends now that these threats exist, these threats are immediate and that something must be done about them.
1) Ask people to be calm in their protests.
2) Ask anonymous to stop aggressive hacking and to concentrate their efforts on retrieving information that should not be kept from the public.
Before the Berlin Wall fell, East German typewriters had to be registered so that all documents could be traced to the author. To us in the west this seemed like a gross invasion of privacy and a terrible threat to our freedom of speech. Now in the 21st century, where freedom seems a given, the US government is convincing US printer manufacturers to do the same – successfully.
ACTA takes this to an extreme, but both are part of a greater problem. I am not saying that once ACTA is made effective freedom of speech will be immediately crushed, if it happens it will happen slowly and in the dark. It will happen unless you and I say ‘no, this is wrong’, and say it now.
