Showing posts with label copyright. Show all posts
Showing posts with label copyright. Show all posts
Wednesday, 15 February 2012
Digital choice the copyright way
Found on a comment list http://dlvr.it/
"See, by only providing content through locked down, time limited, location restricted methods, the studios are actually giving us a lot more choices in how we consume our content.
Dirty pirates can only consume their content in one way: no encryption, HD, and worldwide. But the studios give us an unending stream of different choices that provide real value to their content. Maybe you want DRM that requires a constant connection to the internet. They have that. Maybe you want content that's purposefully degraded. They have that. Maybe you want to be able to watch content only in the US. They have that. Canada? They have that too.
Content that expires after 48 hours? No problem. Maybe you want to have to watch it in the theater? They got you covered. The depth and breadth of choices that the studios provide is something that the evil pirates just cannot cover. The other day I asked someone at the pirate bay for an encrypted copy of The Grey that would only play on my computer for a week and they couldn't do it!"
Tuesday, 15 February 2011
The bard and copyright
The New York Times have a well twittered piece on the value of copyright - that has a central tenet the role that closed theatres had in Shakespears time in stimulating creativity.
The argument is curious as a basis for supporting copyright... there was no copyright back then ... and the monopoly held by the Stationer's company is probably not a shining example of a system designed to stimulate creativity. On the other hand you could point out that it was performance not writing that was the source of revenue and draw useful parallels to the situation today where live performance is proving increasingly important for artists as a source of revenue - including of course in the cinema where showings remain strong.
And as for their closing remarks on the fate of Shakespears Globe - pulled down by authorities in the 17th century to stem the flow of unsettling ideas reaching it's audiences? Doesn't that sound more like a warning about defending an uncensored internet than a call to constrain it in the name of monopoly?
The argument is curious as a basis for supporting copyright... there was no copyright back then ... and the monopoly held by the Stationer's company is probably not a shining example of a system designed to stimulate creativity. On the other hand you could point out that it was performance not writing that was the source of revenue and draw useful parallels to the situation today where live performance is proving increasingly important for artists as a source of revenue - including of course in the cinema where showings remain strong.
And as for their closing remarks on the fate of Shakespears Globe - pulled down by authorities in the 17th century to stem the flow of unsettling ideas reaching it's audiences? Doesn't that sound more like a warning about defending an uncensored internet than a call to constrain it in the name of monopoly?
Gaiman on copyright piracy
I saw this clip on BoingBoing and couldn't resist copying it here.... Neil Gaiman explains why letting people take his work has been good for business.
Saturday, 23 October 2010
Kinsella: Intellectual property hampers capitalism
Author and patent attorney Stephan Kinsella talks on the incompatibility between intellectual property and capitalism.. or put another way - why patents and copyright are bad for business....
Wednesday, 20 October 2010
Stoneage copyright?
You might think that if there is something that is out of copyright this is it... Stonehenge. Erected more than 4000 years before copyright was even thought of it's hard to think of anything that is more in the public domain.
So it's strange to hear that English Heritage are stomping their way round online photo image libraries to tell them that "all commercial interest to sell images (of Stonehenge) must be directed to English Heritage."
Now it may be that the law gives some support to their claim.. presumably because they own the land it stands on, and photographers were on their property at the time... If it does though, I can only sat that the law is an Ass.
So it's strange to hear that English Heritage are stomping their way round online photo image libraries to tell them that "all commercial interest to sell images (of Stonehenge) must be directed to English Heritage."
Now it may be that the law gives some support to their claim.. presumably because they own the land it stands on, and photographers were on their property at the time... If it does though, I can only sat that the law is an Ass.
Tuesday, 13 July 2010
Copyright: How long is long enough?
Last week there was a ruling in Australia on what Men At Work get to pay out for having copied a riff from an Australian folk tune published over 70 years ago... It's actually a folk tune that I learned i school when I was a kid and I have to say I've never even thought about the similarity to 'Down Under'.
It's an interesting reminder though of what it means to have copyright terms that stretch long after an author or artists lifetime. The band clearly made a fair bit of money from their hit - and now have to take a 5% cut from their royalties to pay... well who exactly?
The value for society in copyright lies in the ability to stimulate creativity by giving limited monopoly rights to creators. But here we see that the active creators, the band, are penalised to the benefit of a publishing house who are milking the benefits of someone else's creativity (Marion Sinclair- who died 22 years ago).
Are long copyright terms really serving society's interests? Even within a songwriter or artist's lifetime there is a clear disincentive to create new material if existing material continues to enjoy protection for the rest of their life. The more talented and successful the creator the less incentive they have to work again. Aren't they just the people that society wants to be most active?
Shorter copyright terms increase incentives to bring out and market new innovative material - and will hugely increase the free availability of older materal to be used in new creative ways. It should mean a richer world for all of us... though we might hear some complaints from beyond the veil....
It's an interesting reminder though of what it means to have copyright terms that stretch long after an author or artists lifetime. The band clearly made a fair bit of money from their hit - and now have to take a 5% cut from their royalties to pay... well who exactly?
The value for society in copyright lies in the ability to stimulate creativity by giving limited monopoly rights to creators. But here we see that the active creators, the band, are penalised to the benefit of a publishing house who are milking the benefits of someone else's creativity (Marion Sinclair- who died 22 years ago).
Are long copyright terms really serving society's interests? Even within a songwriter or artist's lifetime there is a clear disincentive to create new material if existing material continues to enjoy protection for the rest of their life. The more talented and successful the creator the less incentive they have to work again. Aren't they just the people that society wants to be most active?
Shorter copyright terms increase incentives to bring out and market new innovative material - and will hugely increase the free availability of older materal to be used in new creative ways. It should mean a richer world for all of us... though we might hear some complaints from beyond the veil....
Friday, 11 June 2010
Thinking 'After Intellectual Property'
I know. I'm behind the times... but wisdom doesn't age. If you've not seen Steal This Film, do. A great perspective on the intellectual property debate...
"These are strange times indeed. While they continue to command so much attention in the mainstream media, the 'battles' between old and new modes of distribution, between the pirate and the institution of copyright, seem to many of us already lost and won. We know who the victors are. Why then say any more?
Because waves of repression continue to come: lawsuits are still levied against innocent people; arrests are still made on flimsy pretexts, in order to terrify and confuse; harsh laws are still enacted against filesharing, taking their place in the gradual erosion of our privacy and the bolstering of the surveillance state. All of this is intended to destroy or delay inexorable changes in what it means to create and exchange our creations. If STEAL THIS FILM II proves at all useful in bringing new people into the leagues of those now" prepared to think 'after intellectual property', think creatively about the future of distribution, production and creativity, we have achieved our main goal."
"These are strange times indeed. While they continue to command so much attention in the mainstream media, the 'battles' between old and new modes of distribution, between the pirate and the institution of copyright, seem to many of us already lost and won. We know who the victors are. Why then say any more?
Because waves of repression continue to come: lawsuits are still levied against innocent people; arrests are still made on flimsy pretexts, in order to terrify and confuse; harsh laws are still enacted against filesharing, taking their place in the gradual erosion of our privacy and the bolstering of the surveillance state. All of this is intended to destroy or delay inexorable changes in what it means to create and exchange our creations. If STEAL THIS FILM II proves at all useful in bringing new people into the leagues of those now" prepared to think 'after intellectual property', think creatively about the future of distribution, production and creativity, we have achieved our main goal."
Friday, 12 February 2010
Privacy, Copyright & Integrity: Steps in the right direction..
I've been a bit busy recently - but things are happening out there in the big wide world...
You no doubt saw that in Australia they've ruled that an ISP shouldn't be held to account for the content carried... a revalidation of the 'pure carrier' doctrine with it's analogy in "don't shoot the messenger". A great commentary on the judgement by Technolama
In the UK, the parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights were not at all happy with the provisions of the governments proposed Digital Economy Bill - which is hardly surprising but reasuring to hear. Meanwile the EU parliament think the privacy of their citizens merits protection and have said no to the Swift agreement that gives the USA bulk access to european banking data. Thanks you guys (& gals)!
The EFF today reports on a victory in the US courts that confirms the 'first rights' principle that if you buy something it's yours to enjoy, share and sell as you like - no matter what small print a company may add on the box. You bought it, you own it.
..and Cory Doctorow explains how if you look into the issues with IP, copyright and innovation you come to very different conclusions than if you crib your research from lobbyists... (from the tireless Michel Geist).
And of course Christian Engström, Piratpartiet's MEP, celebrated making it to the big 50. Congratulations Christian - keep up the good work!
You no doubt saw that in Australia they've ruled that an ISP shouldn't be held to account for the content carried... a revalidation of the 'pure carrier' doctrine with it's analogy in "don't shoot the messenger". A great commentary on the judgement by Technolama
In the UK, the parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights were not at all happy with the provisions of the governments proposed Digital Economy Bill - which is hardly surprising but reasuring to hear. Meanwile the EU parliament think the privacy of their citizens merits protection and have said no to the Swift agreement that gives the USA bulk access to european banking data. Thanks you guys (& gals)!
The EFF today reports on a victory in the US courts that confirms the 'first rights' principle that if you buy something it's yours to enjoy, share and sell as you like - no matter what small print a company may add on the box. You bought it, you own it.
..and Cory Doctorow explains how if you look into the issues with IP, copyright and innovation you come to very different conclusions than if you crib your research from lobbyists... (from the tireless Michel Geist).
And of course Christian Engström, Piratpartiet's MEP, celebrated making it to the big 50. Congratulations Christian - keep up the good work!
Thursday, 14 January 2010
Their Lordships on the Digital Economy
The Pirate Party wiki has an interesting page with extracts from the second reading from the House of Lords on the Digital Economy Bill. Some of the quotes I have to say (but not all) are perceptive and spot on the mark...
"There is a huge danger here. A huge group of our people are doing something that they do not think is wrong or a crime. It is dangerous for us to be putting into effect legislation that puts a whole lot of people in a criminal situation when they do not think that they are committing a crime." Lord Mitchell
"On the whole, the small people will not be protected by patent law because they cannot afford it. There will be no one on the internet looking for their songs being downloaded and no one interested in pursuing those cases. The small people are already putting their stuff out through other methods." Earl of Erroll
"The information obtained by copyright owners, and in a sense laid before ISPs, is allegations of breach of copyright, not infringements in themselves." Lord Clement Jones
"Checking on other people’s internet traffic to see whether file-sharing is taking place is akin to opening somebody’s post in envelopes to see whether they have illegally photocopied books" Baroness Miller
There are lots more - interesting reading...
Piratpartiet and The Pirate Party - Working for copyright reform.
"There is a huge danger here. A huge group of our people are doing something that they do not think is wrong or a crime. It is dangerous for us to be putting into effect legislation that puts a whole lot of people in a criminal situation when they do not think that they are committing a crime." Lord Mitchell
"On the whole, the small people will not be protected by patent law because they cannot afford it. There will be no one on the internet looking for their songs being downloaded and no one interested in pursuing those cases. The small people are already putting their stuff out through other methods." Earl of Erroll
"The information obtained by copyright owners, and in a sense laid before ISPs, is allegations of breach of copyright, not infringements in themselves." Lord Clement Jones
"Checking on other people’s internet traffic to see whether file-sharing is taking place is akin to opening somebody’s post in envelopes to see whether they have illegally photocopied books" Baroness Miller
There are lots more - interesting reading...
Piratpartiet and The Pirate Party - Working for copyright reform.
Urgent: Tell Parliament what you think about your rights
The Joint parliamentary committee on human rights are currently looking for submissions on human rights issues relating particularly to proposed legislation. I came across it quite by chance - but it is a superb opportunity for interested citizens to get their views across - but you need to act now!
From the press release:
"The Joint Committee on Human Rights scrutinizes every Government Bill for its compatibility with human rights, including common law fundamental rights, the Convention rights protected by the Human Rights Act 1998 and the human rights contained in other international obligations of the UK. The Committee's scrutiny of Bills for compatibility with the requirements of human rights law includes consideration of whether the Bill presents an opportunity to enhance human rights in the UK. The Committee is actively seeking to encourage more input from civil society into its legislative scrutiny work.
Further to the Committee's press notice of 28 July 2009, on the Government's draft legislative programme for 2009-10, the Committee has now identified the following nine priority areas for scrutiny in 2010, based on the significance of the human rights issues involved and the likelihood of legislation being passed before the end of the parliamentary session. The Committee would welcome short submissions of up to 1500 words from interested parties by Monday 18 January."
(my highlight)
The areas for submission cover:
Time is short, so if you have views on the above - and several of them have privacy issues and issues areound respect for your private life - then you need to set aside some time during the next few days to put down your views.
Resources to help formulate your submission:e.g on copyright policing
Open Rights Group on Digital Economy Bill
Liberty on the Digital Economy Bill
Latest News on the Digital Economy Bill
There are I'm sure others - I welcome constructive additions in the comments.
PLEASE SPREAD THIS TOPIC!
Updated: now with the link to the press release! Damn....
Piratpartiet and The Pirate Party - Putting privacy first.
From the press release:
"The Joint Committee on Human Rights scrutinizes every Government Bill for its compatibility with human rights, including common law fundamental rights, the Convention rights protected by the Human Rights Act 1998 and the human rights contained in other international obligations of the UK. The Committee's scrutiny of Bills for compatibility with the requirements of human rights law includes consideration of whether the Bill presents an opportunity to enhance human rights in the UK. The Committee is actively seeking to encourage more input from civil society into its legislative scrutiny work.
Further to the Committee's press notice of 28 July 2009, on the Government's draft legislative programme for 2009-10, the Committee has now identified the following nine priority areas for scrutiny in 2010, based on the significance of the human rights issues involved and the likelihood of legislation being passed before the end of the parliamentary session. The Committee would welcome short submissions of up to 1500 words from interested parties by Monday 18 January."
(my highlight)
The areas for submission cover:
- lllegal File Sharing
- DNA & Fingerprints
- Domestic Violence
- Stop & Search
- Enforceable Entitlements for parents and pupils
- Mandatory Sex and Relationships education
- Reporting of family court proceedings
- Entitlement to personal care at home
- Asylum support and destitution
Time is short, so if you have views on the above - and several of them have privacy issues and issues areound respect for your private life - then you need to set aside some time during the next few days to put down your views.
Resources to help formulate your submission:e.g on copyright policing
Open Rights Group on Digital Economy Bill
Liberty on the Digital Economy Bill
Latest News on the Digital Economy Bill
There are I'm sure others - I welcome constructive additions in the comments.
PLEASE SPREAD THIS TOPIC!
Updated: now with the link to the press release! Damn....
Tuesday, 22 December 2009
What goes round comes around... EU, Canada and IP law
Michael Geist has what for me is a depressing post on ongoing negotiations between the EU and Canada on trade.... including big changes in IP law. Depressing because it is the EU that are pressing Canada to implement more stringent measures on copyright including measures against circumvention of digital locks, and copyright term extension from 50 to 70 years. The EU aligns with the US... and then the EU presses Canada to align with the EU.
How about a new process for 2010? The EU aligns with Canada.. and tells the USA that they need to get their act in order and liberalise their IP laws?
Some of the things that are in the proposals include things I didn't even know existed under EU law... like that prohibition on circumventing digital locks - and a resale provision providing royalties for artists on second hand sales of portraits and statues... (When did that arrive???)
Christian, HAX..... what's the low down??????
Piratpartiet and The Pirate Party - Working for copyright reform.
How about a new process for 2010? The EU aligns with Canada.. and tells the USA that they need to get their act in order and liberalise their IP laws?
Some of the things that are in the proposals include things I didn't even know existed under EU law... like that prohibition on circumventing digital locks - and a resale provision providing royalties for artists on second hand sales of portraits and statues... (When did that arrive???)
Christian, HAX..... what's the low down??????
Piratpartiet and The Pirate Party - Working for copyright reform.
Tuesday, 8 December 2009
300 000 strikes.... Record labels in court for piracy face $6Bn bill
Truth they say is stranger than fiction....
..so while record companies are complaining around the world about the costs of piracy, hiring lawyers to demand money from alleged offenders and lobbying anyone who will listen to draft new draconian legislation against file sharers, they are meanwhile quietly ripping off artists by publishing tracks without permission and forgetting to pay the royalties.
Michael Geist reports on a case in Canada where since the eighties record labels have been issuing compilation discs without getting prior permissions and never getting round to settling their dues. Three hundred thousand tracks later they are now in court facing a class action suit by artists... and bearing in mind this is not non-commercial file sharing we're talking about, but out and out commercial exploitation, the artists are seeking statutory damages of $20 000 per track... a cool six billion in total*.
The companies in the dock are Warner Music Canada, Sony BMG Music Canada, EMI Music Canada, and Universal Music Canada - the four primary members of the Canadian Recording Industry Association. Now if I was a shareholder in a company that through ineptitude and bad practice exposed itself to the risk of damages on that scale I would expect heads to roll...
Resignations gentlemen? And don't forget to switch off your Internet as you leave.....
(via Rick Falkvinge)
* Don't forget that $6Bn is around 20 times the recording industries estimates of the annual losses to music piracy in the UK. (..if you believe them?)
Errata: corrected from $60Bn to $6Bn... sloppy maths - sorry!
Piratpartiet and The Pirate Party - Working for copyright reform.
..so while record companies are complaining around the world about the costs of piracy, hiring lawyers to demand money from alleged offenders and lobbying anyone who will listen to draft new draconian legislation against file sharers, they are meanwhile quietly ripping off artists by publishing tracks without permission and forgetting to pay the royalties.
Michael Geist reports on a case in Canada where since the eighties record labels have been issuing compilation discs without getting prior permissions and never getting round to settling their dues. Three hundred thousand tracks later they are now in court facing a class action suit by artists... and bearing in mind this is not non-commercial file sharing we're talking about, but out and out commercial exploitation, the artists are seeking statutory damages of $20 000 per track... a cool six billion in total*.
The companies in the dock are Warner Music Canada, Sony BMG Music Canada, EMI Music Canada, and Universal Music Canada - the four primary members of the Canadian Recording Industry Association. Now if I was a shareholder in a company that through ineptitude and bad practice exposed itself to the risk of damages on that scale I would expect heads to roll...
Resignations gentlemen? And don't forget to switch off your Internet as you leave.....
(via Rick Falkvinge)
* Don't forget that $6Bn is around 20 times the recording industries estimates of the annual losses to music piracy in the UK. (..if you believe them?)
Errata: corrected from $60Bn to $6Bn... sloppy maths - sorry!
Piratpartiet and The Pirate Party - Working for copyright reform.
Monday, 7 December 2009
Record label head resigns to oppose Digital Economy Bill
CMU reports in an article that Anthony Hall, head of record label Pure Mint, is resigning from both the British Phonographic Industry (BPI) and the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (IFPI) because of their support for the Digital Economy Bill. Significantly Mr Hall, who is also a lawyer, has been both a member of the BPI's rights committee and IFPI's International Legal Committee.
His resignation letter is strongly critical of the bill and BPI and IFPI's support for it. His complaints are precisely those that have been raised loudly in other quarters... The bill, the article says "is in danger of disregarding some sacred legal principles (regarding process, presumption of innocence and burden of proof) and ... it won't solve the record industry's piracy problems anyway."
The proposal for new ministerial powers he describes as "wholly undemocratic and contrary to centuries of good practice regarding the forming of our copyright legislation."
Top marks to Mr Hall for showing that integrity and principle matters more than profits. But are government minister's really so blind that they can't see this for themselves???
Piratpartiet and The Pirate Party - Working for copyright reform.
His resignation letter is strongly critical of the bill and BPI and IFPI's support for it. His complaints are precisely those that have been raised loudly in other quarters... The bill, the article says "is in danger of disregarding some sacred legal principles (regarding process, presumption of innocence and burden of proof) and ... it won't solve the record industry's piracy problems anyway."
The proposal for new ministerial powers he describes as "wholly undemocratic and contrary to centuries of good practice regarding the forming of our copyright legislation."
Top marks to Mr Hall for showing that integrity and principle matters more than profits. But are government minister's really so blind that they can't see this for themselves???
Piratpartiet and The Pirate Party - Working for copyright reform.
Telia stick to their guns in IPRED case
Telia have decided to appeal a judgement that they should hand over details of who is behind one of their IP addresses to film companies investigating a torrent search site..
'Protection of customer's integrity is important' they say. It's a pity UK ISPs are not as dedicated to their customers interests (as they hand over thousands of IP addressees details...).
Piratpartiet and The Pirate Party - Working for copyright reform.
'Protection of customer's integrity is important' they say. It's a pity UK ISPs are not as dedicated to their customers interests (as they hand over thousands of IP addressees details...).
Piratpartiet and The Pirate Party - Working for copyright reform.
Sunday, 6 December 2009
Sue, Grabbit and Run: copyright solicitors?
Just this week in the news is that a UK legal firm is preparing 15 000 letters for what I would best describe as judicial blackmail - pay up or we take you to court. Lawfirm ACS:Law requested and are now getting user details from ISPs on 30 000 IP addresses. Many of the alleged infringements apparently relate to pornography and it is thought many people will pay up rather than go to court and defend themselves. An example of this type of threatening letter is available on Wikileaks
To gather the 30 000 IP addresses they used German firm Digiprotect - a specialist in this area renowned from allegations that they seeded copyright material with rightholders permission to then 'catch' people downloading it. In fact only last week their relationship with a German law firm was under investigation for fraud for basing claims for this type of payment on legal costs that don't actually exist.
Previous rounds of this sharp practice has raised hundreds of cases of wrong accusations - but as information from other firms involved in the same business shows- chasing pirates is more profitable that selling music games and videos legally...
(Personally I intrinsically question any process where the costs to recover money for rights holders exceeds the money recovered by a factor of four.... that's a business for making money from litigation, not from creativity)
If you have received this type of threatening letter you could start by reading the advice here from Gareth Halfacree (via Amused Cynicism). If you need help pleading your innocence you may be interested in Torrentfreak's article on a UK law firm that is giving free support for this type of case (dated last year). This thread at Consumer Action group is on the same topic.
Update: also checkout Beingthreatened
More reading:
Extortion Is Profitable Too, Doesn't Mean That It's A Fair Way To Profit Off Piracy
If you think the RIAA sucks check these guys out
Piratpartiet and The Pirate Party - Working for copyright reform.
To gather the 30 000 IP addresses they used German firm Digiprotect - a specialist in this area renowned from allegations that they seeded copyright material with rightholders permission to then 'catch' people downloading it. In fact only last week their relationship with a German law firm was under investigation for fraud for basing claims for this type of payment on legal costs that don't actually exist.
Previous rounds of this sharp practice has raised hundreds of cases of wrong accusations - but as information from other firms involved in the same business shows- chasing pirates is more profitable that selling music games and videos legally...
(Personally I intrinsically question any process where the costs to recover money for rights holders exceeds the money recovered by a factor of four.... that's a business for making money from litigation, not from creativity)
If you have received this type of threatening letter you could start by reading the advice here from Gareth Halfacree (via Amused Cynicism). If you need help pleading your innocence you may be interested in Torrentfreak's article on a UK law firm that is giving free support for this type of case (dated last year). This thread at Consumer Action group is on the same topic.
Update: also checkout Beingthreatened
More reading:
Extortion Is Profitable Too, Doesn't Mean That It's A Fair Way To Profit Off Piracy
If you think the RIAA sucks check these guys out
Piratpartiet and The Pirate Party - Working for copyright reform.
Standards of justice - rights, wrongs and copyright infringement
Non-commercial copying of copyrighted maerial is a long established practice - covering everything from sharing recipes, photo copying course notes and taping material from the TV or radio. What has changed in recent years is not that it happens - rather, that technology has made it easier to do -while at the same time technology makes it practical in many instances to see that it is happening.
What is legal - and how infringement is addressed - differ in different countries. In Britain (as I understand it) it's still an infringement of copyright to copy your LPs onto tape - or your CDs onto your media server. As for making a compilation from your records collection to give to your girlfriend.... Hots coals and the lash await...
Enforcement is the proof of the pudding - putting individuals in the firing line for having shared copyrighted material.
This week has seen two interesting court cases in Sweden. First a court in Södertorn decided that Telia Sonera were obliged to hand over details of who runs the Torrent search engine SweTorrents to Antipiratbyrån - a lobby and enforcement organisation for the media industry. The judgement included in it's rationale both that SweTorrents had a large number of copyright works uploaded onto the site - and that the site has been used to download material.
Now it's hard for me to comment on whether providing a search engine counts as abetting copyright infringement under the letter of the current law.... but those aren't legal judgements - they are matters of fact. It's a search engine.. there are no files on the site to download - and nor can you upload to the site... so if that's the basis of the judgement it's a pretty dodgy one. No surprise then that Rick Falkvinge pulls it apart in an article that argues that information politics and it's importance for economic development are too important to leave media industry lobbyists to set the agenda.
Another judgement came this week - this one from the Swedish High Court - saying that broadband operator Portlane is not required to shut off access for a tracker site, Opentorrent. Here they stated
"För att medverka till upphovsrättsintrång krävs mer av en mellanhand "än tillhandahållande av en internetaccess".
namely:
" in order to contribute to copyright infringement an intermediary needs to do more than provide an internet access".
This judgement is interesting to contrast with the the current proposals in the UK's proposed Digital Economy Bill which will put specific responsibilities onto operators for policing copyright. And notwithstanding the lack of technical knowledge shown in the first case - both cases show considerably more interest in the individuals rights and a just process than we see in the UKs current legal and political arena .
Piratpartiet and The Pirate Party - Working for copyright reform.
What is legal - and how infringement is addressed - differ in different countries. In Britain (as I understand it) it's still an infringement of copyright to copy your LPs onto tape - or your CDs onto your media server. As for making a compilation from your records collection to give to your girlfriend.... Hots coals and the lash await...
Enforcement is the proof of the pudding - putting individuals in the firing line for having shared copyrighted material.
This week has seen two interesting court cases in Sweden. First a court in Södertorn decided that Telia Sonera were obliged to hand over details of who runs the Torrent search engine SweTorrents to Antipiratbyrån - a lobby and enforcement organisation for the media industry. The judgement included in it's rationale both that SweTorrents had a large number of copyright works uploaded onto the site - and that the site has been used to download material.
Now it's hard for me to comment on whether providing a search engine counts as abetting copyright infringement under the letter of the current law.... but those aren't legal judgements - they are matters of fact. It's a search engine.. there are no files on the site to download - and nor can you upload to the site... so if that's the basis of the judgement it's a pretty dodgy one. No surprise then that Rick Falkvinge pulls it apart in an article that argues that information politics and it's importance for economic development are too important to leave media industry lobbyists to set the agenda.
Another judgement came this week - this one from the Swedish High Court - saying that broadband operator Portlane is not required to shut off access for a tracker site, Opentorrent. Here they stated
"För att medverka till upphovsrättsintrång krävs mer av en mellanhand "än tillhandahållande av en internetaccess".
namely:
" in order to contribute to copyright infringement an intermediary needs to do more than provide an internet access".
This judgement is interesting to contrast with the the current proposals in the UK's proposed Digital Economy Bill which will put specific responsibilities onto operators for policing copyright. And notwithstanding the lack of technical knowledge shown in the first case - both cases show considerably more interest in the individuals rights and a just process than we see in the UKs current legal and political arena .
Piratpartiet and The Pirate Party - Working for copyright reform.
Thursday, 3 December 2009
A photographer's view of the Digital Economy Bill
Following this morning's post on the Digital Economy Bill I came across two sites of interest if you want to follow it's progress... The first is a twitter stream on the bill - clearly a good spot to head for for up to date comment.
The second is Pro-imaging - a site 'supporting professional image creators' who are following the bill's progress because online intellectual property is a clearly of interest for people making a living from photography. Apart from some useful links on submitting comments and following the bill's progress in the house they raise some points on what they see the bill misses.
The first is a proposal to add compulsory school education in Intellectual Property... I understand where they are coming from - but it's something I personally am against. Firstly if it's not already mandated after two hundred years of copyright it is hard to see it as a 'must have' - and secondly it's a topic that could easily turn into indoctrination rather than education. That's not to say that I don't think there is value in school students debating intellectual property issues - but since principles of intellectual property have a clear political dimension we should be very wary of mandating what students should be taught to believe..
The second though I do support - an artists right to attribution - in principle at least. Clearly passing someone else's work off as your own is fraud and shouldn't be condoned. On the other hand their proposal of making it an offence to tamper with metadata in a file...... sounds like a big sledgehammer for a pretty small nut. I'm not sure it's practical - how would you prove who made changes to the meta data on a file? And I have no idea what is lodged as meta data if I edit or crop a file and then save it. (When does it become a secondary work?). If I change format and the meta data is not transferred is that an offence.... Nya. Not such a great idea......
Piratpartiet and The Pirate Party - Working for copyright reform.
The second is Pro-imaging - a site 'supporting professional image creators' who are following the bill's progress because online intellectual property is a clearly of interest for people making a living from photography. Apart from some useful links on submitting comments and following the bill's progress in the house they raise some points on what they see the bill misses.
The first is a proposal to add compulsory school education in Intellectual Property... I understand where they are coming from - but it's something I personally am against. Firstly if it's not already mandated after two hundred years of copyright it is hard to see it as a 'must have' - and secondly it's a topic that could easily turn into indoctrination rather than education. That's not to say that I don't think there is value in school students debating intellectual property issues - but since principles of intellectual property have a clear political dimension we should be very wary of mandating what students should be taught to believe..
The second though I do support - an artists right to attribution - in principle at least. Clearly passing someone else's work off as your own is fraud and shouldn't be condoned. On the other hand their proposal of making it an offence to tamper with metadata in a file...... sounds like a big sledgehammer for a pretty small nut. I'm not sure it's practical - how would you prove who made changes to the meta data on a file? And I have no idea what is lodged as meta data if I edit or crop a file and then save it. (When does it become a secondary work?). If I change format and the meta data is not transferred is that an offence.... Nya. Not such a great idea......
Piratpartiet and The Pirate Party - Working for copyright reform.
Kill Bill: Stopping the Digital Economy Bill
You must have heard about the Digital Economy Bill... the UK government's proposals for regulating the Internet. It's been widely criticised - particularly for continuing to promote the governments line on excluding users from the Internet and for obscene new powers for ministers to make up copyright enforcement as they go along. The leaders in the digital economy are firmly against it - including both ISPs and industry heavyweights like Google, Yahoo and eBay. The EFF describes in no uncertain terms that this bill will fetter the digital economy and stifle innovation.
Don't like it? Then don't accept it. Here's some simple steps to take to help stop this unacceptable legislation.
More on the DEB:
Open Rights: The Digital Economy Bill - a first critical look
Liberty: Disconnection is disproportionate and indiscriminate
Mandy and Me: Some thoughts on the Digital Economy Bill
Britain's new Internet Law - as bad as everyone has been saying, and worse.
Piratpartiet and The Pirate Party - Working for copyright reform.
Don't like it? Then don't accept it. Here's some simple steps to take to help stop this unacceptable legislation.
- Write to your MP ... or visit them. Tell them in simple terms why this is a BAD proposal.
- Write to a Lord. The bill has to pass the Lords. Yesterday was the second reading but it will be back. Details here from the Open Rights group. Note - choose one of the Lords listed as a speaker in the debate (listed in the comments)
- Join the Open Rights Group. Strong membership (and financial support) help them to lobby on this and other digital rights issues.
- Join the Pirate Party. Britains only political party dedicated to protecting users rights on the Internet and creating a forward looking digital economy. Becoming a pirate shows that the digital economy matters to voters - and there is an election coming up.
- Sign the petition against the bill at Number10.gov (now almost 29 000 signatures)
- Join the Facebook group - I won’t vote for any MP who supports Mandelson’s Digital Economy Bill -and remember to tell your MP!
- Blog about it...
- Make sure all your friends do too (all of the above!)
More on the DEB:
Open Rights: The Digital Economy Bill - a first critical look
Liberty: Disconnection is disproportionate and indiscriminate
Mandy and Me: Some thoughts on the Digital Economy Bill
Britain's new Internet Law - as bad as everyone has been saying, and worse.
Piratpartiet and The Pirate Party - Working for copyright reform.
Saturday, 28 November 2009
ACTA update - Things afoot in EU, US, NZ & AUS
There has been a lot of vocal opposition to ACTA over recent days - some of it against the secrecy of the process and some of it against the content of the treaty itself. EFF already have a good round up so take a stop by there as well....
In the US, two senators have sent a letter to the US trade representative asking for ACTA documents to be made public. Meanwhile Swedish Minister for Communications Åsa Torstensson is on her way to Washington to lobby for opening up the negotiations to more public scrutiny - and to express the Swedish governments view that ACTA opening up for a three strikes policy for internet access termination is unacceptable.
Michael Geist is a good source as usual - reporting amongst other things that the EU has filed it's responses on the ACTA internet chapter - available here. ...that the kiwis are waking up to why ACTA is no good thing - and an analysis of the impact of ACTA in Australia. And he also links to a MUST READ piece from the american Library Copyright Alliance on the scope and implications of ACTA.
"ACTA could alter ways in which intellectual property infringement is discovered and penalized;
expand the reach and activity of courts in prosecuting intellectual property infringers; alter the scope of civil and criminal infringement; lower the threshold at which criminal infringement is defined, thus increasing cases of criminal infringement; increase remedies, including monetary damages and reimbursement of legal fees and costs in cases of infringement; increase border searching; and increase instances of confiscation and destruction of goods."
The EFF meanwhile highlight the ongoing double standard, with action to harmonize on the 'best practice' for copyright enforcement, without similar harmonization on best practices for fair use and educational and other exemptions.
"In the U.S. Copyright Office's WIPO treaty consultation, they are claiming that such a harmonization of standard copyright limitations would "begin to dismantle the existing global treaty structure of copyright law, through the adoption of an international instrument at odds with existing, longstanding and well-settled norms."
What comes through is that the world is waking up to the carve up that's taking place behind closed doors and that the ACTA train is starting to see some obstructions on the rails.....
Piratpartiet and The Pirate Party - Working for copyright reform.
In the US, two senators have sent a letter to the US trade representative asking for ACTA documents to be made public. Meanwhile Swedish Minister for Communications Åsa Torstensson is on her way to Washington to lobby for opening up the negotiations to more public scrutiny - and to express the Swedish governments view that ACTA opening up for a three strikes policy for internet access termination is unacceptable.
Michael Geist is a good source as usual - reporting amongst other things that the EU has filed it's responses on the ACTA internet chapter - available here. ...that the kiwis are waking up to why ACTA is no good thing - and an analysis of the impact of ACTA in Australia. And he also links to a MUST READ piece from the american Library Copyright Alliance on the scope and implications of ACTA.
"ACTA could alter ways in which intellectual property infringement is discovered and penalized;
expand the reach and activity of courts in prosecuting intellectual property infringers; alter the scope of civil and criminal infringement; lower the threshold at which criminal infringement is defined, thus increasing cases of criminal infringement; increase remedies, including monetary damages and reimbursement of legal fees and costs in cases of infringement; increase border searching; and increase instances of confiscation and destruction of goods."
The EFF meanwhile highlight the ongoing double standard, with action to harmonize on the 'best practice' for copyright enforcement, without similar harmonization on best practices for fair use and educational and other exemptions.
"In the U.S. Copyright Office's WIPO treaty consultation, they are claiming that such a harmonization of standard copyright limitations would "begin to dismantle the existing global treaty structure of copyright law, through the adoption of an international instrument at odds with existing, longstanding and well-settled norms."
What comes through is that the world is waking up to the carve up that's taking place behind closed doors and that the ACTA train is starting to see some obstructions on the rails.....
Piratpartiet and The Pirate Party - Working for copyright reform.
Sunday, 22 November 2009
Legalise filesharing: Wise words from that William Bloke
Billy Bragg.. a leading figure in the Featured Artist Coalition .. has made a press release in conjunction with a concert in Ottawa urging Canadian legislators to legalise filesharing.
"Mr. Bragg.. joined NDP MP Charlie Angus Friday to press Ottawa to avoid criminalizing music downloading when it updates copyright protection law.
The British singer and the New Democrats are calling on Ottawa to let artists find a way to make music file swapping a legitimate part of promotion and sales.
Mr. Bragg and other artists want to see new ways to pay performers for music available online while protecting downloaders. He said record labels will often sell entire catalogues to websites without giving the artists a cut."
Billy is also one of the founders of a2f2a - a blog site aiming to provide a forum for debate between fans and artists.
A2F2A blogging about the press conference quotes Billy as saying:
“The internet brings fans and artists closer together than ever before and brings great benefits to both. Let’s not allow the record industry to keep us apart in order to protect their old broken business model.”
I can't argue with that...
Piratpartiet and The Pirate Party - Working for copyright reform.
"Mr. Bragg.. joined NDP MP Charlie Angus Friday to press Ottawa to avoid criminalizing music downloading when it updates copyright protection law.
The British singer and the New Democrats are calling on Ottawa to let artists find a way to make music file swapping a legitimate part of promotion and sales.
Mr. Bragg and other artists want to see new ways to pay performers for music available online while protecting downloaders. He said record labels will often sell entire catalogues to websites without giving the artists a cut."
Billy is also one of the founders of a2f2a - a blog site aiming to provide a forum for debate between fans and artists.
A2F2A blogging about the press conference quotes Billy as saying:
“The internet brings fans and artists closer together than ever before and brings great benefits to both. Let’s not allow the record industry to keep us apart in order to protect their old broken business model.”
I can't argue with that...
Piratpartiet and The Pirate Party - Working for copyright reform.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
