The DMCA Is Just The Beginning 390
dr. greenthumb writes: "With the Sklyarov-case still fresh in memory, the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) wants to rally up against the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA) in order to preserve privacy and freedom of speech. The FTAA is currently negotiating agreements with several countries in the Western hemisphere concerning, among other issues, intellectual property rights. According to the EEF, the FTAA organization is considering treaty language that mandates nations pass anti-circumvention provisions similar to the DMCA, except the FTAA treaty grants even greater control to publishers than the DMCA."
Times like this... (Score:5, Interesting)
(And watch as I am moderated to -1 for this comment)
Intellectual Property (Score:2, Interesting)
By constrast, Intellectual Property Law serves the legitimate purpose of attempting to guarantee that the originator of an idea or creative work can earn income based on his creation without competing with others who grasp what it is he has done. Unfortunately quite often digital technology circumvents this process my allowing people free access to music, art, books, software, etc. without ever compensating the inventor.
Ultimately fair use comes from the principal that people should be able to use portions of a work when doing so is not for financial gain and to do so does not cause a lost of income to the property rights holder. As long as people percieve that they are losing money, they are not going to be happy about technologies that allow for copying and sharing.
This is something that the world will have to confront. I don't think the answer is to shut down the development and use of technology. Clearly when people are using technologies for illegal financial advantages, they can be targetted with existing law. The question is what to do with all the small time players who only "steal" a few MP3s or a little software?
What I would like to see is a paradigm shift in how we think about digital information and creative works. A world where music, movies, software, etc. are entirely free and subsidized by the government could be a wonderful place to live. Of course with fewer or no economic incentives the produce these works, one might lose quality people who value the huge profits of today. Trnasitioning to such a world would be a hard sell and lengthy process. Perhaps if subscription services become the norm then we can progress until everyone pays a flat tax for "entertainment & software services".
It could happen...
Hello Latin America? Who to Call? (Score:3, Interesting)
Given the importance of this issue, it seems having lobbying/communication is required in Latin American nations regarding this subject.
How can this issue be communicated to those in Latin America with potential interest/influence of local governments? Has someone forward this information to Miguel de Iczara? I understand he has connections to the current administration in Mexico. Perhaps there are technological associations in Latin America who may be communicated this issue and rallied?
Given the effect of the DMCA in the US, American citizens probably have little influence --- maybe those in Latin America can make a difference.
It's been time, join the club (Score:2, Interesting)
http://www.stopftaa.org/
http://www.citizen.org/pctrade/gattwto/gatthome
http://www.indymedia.org/
http://www.zmag.org/ZNETTOPnoanimation.html
Re:i just don't get it (Score:3, Interesting)
They have no desire to trump up false claims because it would ruin their name. Their name is the most important asset that an accountant has. If I was asked to calculate how much we lost in sales I would probably poll a sample of the pirates (assuming that's possible) and ask them if they would have purchased the product if that was the only way they could have obtained it.
Using that sample I would deduce the total amount of potential revenue lost to theft.
I think the exaggerated claims you're referring to come from lawyers, not accountants. (On a side note: I started to doubt the entire accounting business now that pro forma financial statements are becoming the norm. However, that's unrelated to this topic.) PS Don't haze me for being off topic. I care about my Karma.
So how do we make it stop? (Score:2, Interesting)
These arguments won't have any impact on our Congress because for the most part, our elected officials lack the intellectual ability to comprehend them, and in any case, they can be considered employees of the content providers.
What's left? Figuring out how to make the anti-democratic behavior of the content providers unprofitable by whatever means necessary.
Economic boycott against targeted content providers would be a good start.
Enclosure for the new millenium (Score:2, Interesting)
In the 19th century, small farmers and landless farmers were forced off their land and into the factories. Now, software patents and other IP nonsense is making it more and more difficult for independent programmers and small businesses. Since we can't afford enough lawyers to own the patents for the software we create, we will be left with less and less choices. And already we're working 10+ hours a day.
It's time we stood up for ourselves and starting looking out for our own interests. It's time we started fighting back where we have the most power -- in our workplaces. As individuals, we can't change much, but at all the Microsofts, Adobes, AOLs, and IBMs, there are thousands of programmers that keep these companies running, that create the "intellectual property" these corporations value so highly. If we join together [iww.org], we can take back some of our power and turn things around.
Re:Canada (Score:3, Interesting)
The way things are going organised lobbying, both from megacorps and political interest groups may well be the demise of the US Constitution. The former tend to attack the IP clause, 1st, 4th & 5th ammendments, the latter tending to go more for the 10th and 14th
Also all of these people are masters at making their motivation (be it prevention of "piracy" or protection of "minorities") appear completly reasonable.
All it should take is a smart lawyer arguing that digital is no different than analog, the only difference is that the IP cartels are LYING about it being different so as to flout the Constitution in ways they were smacked down on in cases relating to analog technology. Judges may be clueless with regard to technology, but they are DEFINATELY not clueless if informed that a "fast one" is being pulled on them.
Though they appear able to fool a lot more people than simply judges and lawyers. e.g. The USPO apparently taking the view that using a computer equates to innovation (even if the method involved predates Christ.) Let alone that the DMCA was apparently passed without even being read.
However, those who live elsewhere may not have the advantage of having a Constitution written by men who loathed overreaching government more than any other founders
However holding up any constitution as some kind of "holy document" rendres it worthless. The people who wrote the US constitution would probably have taken action at least 20 years ago (before things got to the point that sufficent action carried a high risk of civil war.)