Matze Schmidt on Sun, 12 Feb 2012 02:31:47 +0100 (CET) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
<nettime> ACTA Act |
|<---------- Width: 72 Chars - Fixed Font: Courier New, 10 ----------->| For the n0name newsletter by Ali Emas ACTA Act In the subway I had to ask three young women, who had tacked the word on their jackets or put it on their mouth protection, "What is ACTA?". One of them just said: "Youtube". This direct and perfect hook-up of the locutive and the illocutive parts within the act of speech <in the speech act theory the act of speeking which linguistically always means something extralinguistic>, by which Reality and Adress of its Finding coincide, caused in my case -- smart online -- already the perlocution, this action convinced for operation, in which the result of the speech act time-wise coincides with its execution. I don't remember, had forgotten every plea. The trade agreement that has been protested in February was already not up-to-date anymore in the seconds of the selection of apppropriate search engines and was discarded by the government in a play of words, "ad acta" in the words of the electronic press. But the act and its linguistical appeal (or the other way round), did they not fall apart in this? If this agreement complicates juridically more than it resolves for the capital, therefore harms the mittelstand, and when the resistance forms en massive while simultaneously they abandon the intentions to ratify the agreement, to what extend therefore is "conscient what ACTA means" (modified quote Markus Beckedahl, netzpolitik.org)? Some wrote about the ratio of distribution and that a tightened Copyright Law would not bring the little author any profit. Exactly the piratistic ostensible self-employment. Or do they want Diversity? In front of the Mall, in cheap gold and red stone before the concrete, the "mobile" sausage vendors are standing in the cold and the even attacked ACTA will do nothing. The Office for Public Order and Regulation says: "Prohibition would be an intervention in the freedom of trade." So prohibition, the tightened protection of the Copyright Holder of the idea to let people even those in wheelchairs sell sausages with hawker's trays would disturb diversified competition. At this point locution, illocution and perlocution coincide again: The assertion in language about the fact of business competition and the course of action with the help of an assertion in language and the persuasion by this speech act are one. What kind of tape with the sign "ACTA" at the mouth changes that? Again merely the Power of Speech instead of the Power of Activeness. Both are separable despite of Speech Activism. # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org