By Fjodor on Jan. 29, 2012.
I sent four nearly identical mails today, one each to MEPs Bendt Bendtsen, Anne E. Jensen, Morten LÃ¸kkegaard, and Jens Rohde at their respective europarl.europa.eu email addresses.
I chose these four, since they are listed as the 4 Danish MEPs who voted against certain amendments to ACTA (mentioned by Marietje Schaake on Reddit) in 2010 according to votewatch.eu here (please adjust the search criteria to match those relevant to you).
Below is the text of the mail to Bendt Bendtsen, wherein I identify myself as a Danish Conservative voter (the three others are from an allied party, where I identify my political stance with are more general term), but also as a somewhat tech savvy internet user, thus wanting an explanation for the past negative vote, clarification on their current stance on ACTA ratification, and offering assistance in understanding (and hopefully, eventually, agreeing with) the huge public opposition. If I get the time later, I will translate into English in the comments – if someone else wants to do so for me, they shall be most welcome 😉
Subject: Tidligere afstemning om Ã¦ndringer til ACTA
KÃ¦re Hr. Bendtsen,
I henhold til http://www.votewatch.eu/cx_vote_details.php?id_act=1189&euro_vot_valoare=-&euro_vot_rol_euro_grup=&euro_vot_rol_euro_tara=&vers=2&order_by=euro_parlamentar_nume&order=ASC&last_order_by=euro_parlamentar_nume&limit=0&offset=0&nextorder=ASC&euro_tara_id=17&euro_grup_id=&euro_vot_valoare=-&euro_vot_rol_euro_grup= ser jeg, at De stemte imod Ã¦ndringsforslag til ACTA d. 24.11.2010.
Som konservativ vÃ¦lger, men ogsÃ¥ som moderne internetbruger med omfattende teknologisk viden, vil jeg gerne udbede mig en forklaring pÃ¥ dette, samt sikre mig, at De ikke er fejlinformeret, sÃ¥fremt De pÃ¥regner at stemme for at ratificere ACTA i sin nuvÃ¦rende form.
Skulle dette vÃ¦re tilfÃ¦ldet, stÃ¥r jeg gerne til rÃ¥dighed med henblik pÃ¥ at pÃ¥vise, hvorfor ACTA i sin nuvÃ¦rende form, som den forholder sig til spÃ¸rgsmÃ¥l af elektronisk karakter, er aldeles uacceptabel, samt hvorfor dens udfÃ¦rdigelse og ratificering har vÃ¦ret, er og vil vÃ¦re et groft uanstÃ¦ndigt anslag mod bÃ¥de demokratiske grundprincipper og basale frihedsrettigheder.
N.B.: Being in a hurry, I opened the message body of the mail to Anne E. Jensen with “KÃ¦re Hr. Bendtsen,”, instead of personalising the opening to her. I sent a follow-up email apologising for this, but requesting her answer none the less.
By Fjodor on Jan. 19, 2012.
Let me start by stating that I don’t know if Google enjoy any Common Carrier (or other, similar) protections, but if not, it shouldn’t be all too hard for them to block access by IP addresses from known SOPA/PIPA proponents, plus, if they want to play hardball, any US Administration addresses as well.
Same goes for all other protesters.
As an additional nugget of legislative gold, I would assume that if they blocked the Administration, said Administration would need to institute and document a way of circumventing said blockade in order to get anything meaningful business done, which could be an interesting subject for a DMCA complaint, since SOPA/PIPA seem to assume that DNS filtering constitutes an effective means of restricting access…
I am not a US citizen, and thus, even if I was a lawyer, my expertise would not be in US law, but comments are more than welcome!