I'm declaring the treaty, as we know it, unjust because it directly violates limitations on the government set forth by our constitution: the right to be secure in my person and my papers (and, by extension, my communications - the internet), and assumes guilt instead of innocence (punishing based on accusations instead of proof).<p>The problem, of course, is that this treaty is being negotiated by many parties with competing interests, but no party is representing the people who will actually be affected by this treaty. The people discussing the treaty are paid for and bought by controlling copyright interests, and not by the people.<p>Therefore it is fundamentally different: it is not a negotiation at the behest of The People. It is a negotiation  based on the trade and control powers of multinational corporations. It's diametrically opposed to freedom, because the free are not involved at any level in its construction, negotiation, and ratification. The fact that they are so secretive about the negotiations as to eject and ridicule third-party observes proves that they are not acting in the best interest of said third party observers.<p>(I would have no problems with the treaties being discussed / negotiated in secret, if there were bona fide representatives of People and specific safeguards against the treaty being unilaterally used to oppress the masses)