Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
The Courts Government News

Robin Gross and IP Justice 117

Posted by CowboyNeal from the that-other-ip dept.
ethereal writes "According to this news.com article, former EFF attorney Robin Gross is starting up a new group called IP Justice in order to 'promote balance in global intellectual property law.' Her greatest fear? 'That we're too late.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Robin Gross and IP Justice More

Robin Gross and IP Justice

Comments Filter:

  • Not too trivialize Robin, but she's hot in leather (Score:2, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward
    I come not to trivialize Robin, but to celebrate her. Not to take away from her skills but to acknowledge her assets.

    Lara Croft ain't got nuthin on her.

    in leather [crummy.com], and now with more leather, and a smile [lugod.org].

    You go gurrl!

  • I'd like to know more about combined efforts (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Badgerman ( 19207 ) on Friday January 24, 2003 @08:43AM (#5149901)
    I'm glad to see a group addresing international IP. I'd like to know more about her plans to combine efforts with other groups, such as the EFF.

    I am glad someone is working on the international level. The big picture does need to be addressed.

    • Voice of the little people (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward
      What about cases where IP theft has occured, in these instances, how will they be rectified, I would love to give the small people with ideas enough clout to topple those monoliths of doom.
    • I am glad someone is working on the international level. The big picture does need to be addressed.

      This is a fine idea, and I commend them for it. Nonetheless, no single organization has the money, power, and influence to really win the hearts and minds of lawmakers on a global scale. We're talking about fighting huge names in tech and entertainment industries both here and abroad. It's not going to do much good. Unless of course this group focuses on inspiring and organizing the world-wide network of geeks already in place. Most however, are inert and don't really care one way or another about IP issues (and a lot even agree with nonsense like patents).

  • It's never too late (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Kultamarja ( 226210 ) on Friday January 24, 2003 @08:44AM (#5149903)
    A fear of being too late in misplaced in this case. When it comes to issues like legistation it is never too late. Time and again throughout history different nations have had very opressive laws, often strictly against public opinion. And each time in the end they have been changed or made null and void. Or do you see the laws of the third reich still in power in Germany? Laws as biased as the DMCA simply cannot last, arguments like "we fear there is too much momentum, and that we are late" only serve the purpose of drawing more attention to the cause and bringing about the change faster, which is good in this case.

    • Re:It's never too late (Score:4, Interesting)

      by halftrack ( 454203 ) <jonkje@gmailLION.com minus cat> on Friday January 24, 2003 @08:59AM (#5149946) Homepage
      Maybe not the best comparsion as the third reich lost those laws when they lost a war and were put under control of foreigners.

      I can't think of any other, more valid, example so I actually disagree. When passed, laws are hard to remove. When was the last time you heard more regular laws being changed without there being a clear change in government? (Going from an oppressive to a democratic, non oppressive.)

      • Re:It's never too late (Score:5, Informative)

        by warmcat ( 3545 ) on Friday January 24, 2003 @09:11AM (#5149995)
        Prohibition.
        • What? I can finally smoke a joint in the US without being arrested?

          Why wasn't I told?

        • Changed by massive civil disobedience. See also equal rights for them uppity nigras that haunt Strom's dreams, abortion, gay rights, the Vietnam draft, uh, British colonial rule. See a pattern?
        • Prohibition left its mark on US law, though. In its attempt to give law enforcement the tools it needed to deal with a poorly written law, the Supreme Court expanded search and seizure, let wire tapping go through, and set the grounds for much of modern day rug enforcement behavior.

          Just about the only good thing that came out of it was the definition of entrapment.

          (IANAL, just an interested amateur historian).
      • Even in our own country I can think of two specific examples of repressive laws & organizations being broken up without a revolution. Look at Teddy Roosevelt busting up various trusts (something that was unprecedented), or the albeit painful development of equal rights for women and blacks. Especially in the case of racial discrimination there were numerous laws to not only enforce discrimination, but disenfranchise those people who the Federal government was explicitely trying to give a voice.
      • When was the last time you heard more regular laws being changed without there being a clear change in government?

        Quite often, actually. Civil Rights, Women's Lib, the repeal of Prohibition, etc.

        The problem with IP laws is that they aren't a clear "remove the law and get more freedom" issue. All three kinds of IP law are a balance between The People and The IP Holders, but The People generally don't care for the contract negotations.

    • No E-Patents. (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward
      There is a IP lock-in!

      Once patent law covers a specific area there are business interests against a change. There is no way back.

      Meanwhile lawyers try to promote a European directive on computer-implemented inventions. It was written by BSA. Computer professionals ecc. try to defeat. So we need your help, do it the Amnesty International Way. Please write to EU Parliamentarians. EU patent law also affects the United States and other countries.

      Sign our http://www.noepatents.org
      petition or get more infomation by FFII swpat AG
      http://swpat.ffii.org

      We shall start before it is too late.

    • Re:It's never too late (Score:5, Interesting)

      by ajs ( 35943 ) <ajs.ajs@com> on Friday January 24, 2003 @09:28AM (#5150041) Homepage Journal
      A fear of being too late is well placed in this case. When it comes to issues like legislation, it's often too late. Time and again throughout history different nations have had very progressive laws, often stictly conforming to public opinion. And each time in the end they have been changed or made null and void. Or do you see the laws of the ancient Greeks still in power in Greece? Laws as liberal as the bill of rights simply cannot last, arguments like "we hope there is too much profit, and they are too late" only serve the purpose of drawing more attention to the feeding frenzy and stifling change more completely, which is good in this case.

      Obviously, the above doesn't scan so well, as I was trying to keep strictly to your wording. However, I think it does do a good job of illustrating your main logical failure. "Look upon their works, ye mighty and rejoice" isn't as on the money as you might think, especially if the pattern holds and change for the better only comes through pain and suffering and ulitmately leads to corruption anyway (e.g. the French Revolution, Russian Revolution, etc).
    • Yes, it can be too late. The US Constitution has a clause prohibiting the govt from taking private property for govt or public use.

      Since the Supremes upheld the constitutionality of the Sonny Bono copyright extention, all existing copyrights would have to be grandfathered.

      • Yeah, but why assume that a copyright, patent, or trademark is private property for 5th Amendment purposes? If it were, it would be pretty stupid that it must ultimately expire, or could be revoked under certain circumstances, or that "easements" of a sort can be imposed on it.

        I don't think that a retroactive revocation would qualify as a taking.
    • A fear of being too late in misplaced in this case.

      It depends on how you look at it. On one side, it's always too late because if it was just a little sooner a lot of damage could be avoided. Hindsight is always 20/20... On the other hand, it's never too late to do some good, even if it's not as much good as it would have been 10 years ago.
    • Unfortunately, given globalization, this is no longer a matter of domestic legislation that a country can change on its own with only domestic consequences.

      A great number of countries have signed treaties that require the signatories to have certain IP provisions in their domestic laws. See, for example, the 1994 WTO TRIPS agreement, to which most of the world is a signatory. A number of bilateral treaties contain far more restrictive provisions than TRIPs -- a number of them actually require DCMA-like provisions to be enacted. Violation of these treaty obligations has consequences: you will be subject to trade sanctions. If your country knows that when its breaks a deal which it voluntarily signed, the result will be that the major content-producing countries (say the US, the EU and maybe Japan) impose severe trade sanctions on your country, which cripple your economy and the well-being of all your citizens, well, a lot of reasonable people in your country might find it very hard to agree to break the deal.

  • Good for her! (Score:5, Funny)

    by Matrix2110 ( 190829 ) on Friday January 24, 2003 @08:46AM (#5149910) Journal
    I say that her heart is in the right place, and where was this kind of commitment four years ago?

    My best wishes and I will support this kind of thing with all of my soul.

    Is she married?
    • I say that her heart is in the right place, and where was this kind of commitment four years ago?

      Well, four years ago she was just about to launch the EFF's Campaign for Audio-visual Free Expression (CAFE). (According to her bio [eff.org], she's the Director of said Campaign, as well as the EFF's Staff Attorney.)

      My best wishes and I will support this kind of thing with all of my soul.

      I'd certainly expect a lot of support from this kind of community, as the other groups have already found - the question is whether or not that support can be translated into progress... (The DMCA is still there, the EU version is now coming into force, and DRM is starting to appear already - despite the existence of the EFF and co. Will one more really make a big difference??)

      Is she married?

      Yes. (To a musician, with whom she co-founded this site [virtualrecordings.com].)

  • GREAT (Score:5, Insightful)

    by e8johan ( 605347 ) on Friday January 24, 2003 @08:49AM (#5149917) Homepage Journal

    "One is the idea that we should have the right to control our own individual experience of creative works. When we're in the privacy of our own homes, and we're using DVDs or CDs that we own on the computers that we own, that Hollywood doesn't have a right to tell us how we can use that media."

    Sounds like a good attitude to me. I wonder if there would be any impact in Hollywood if this message was repeated enough many times.

    "I'll start with who has the worst IP laws, because that's actually the easiest. It's the United States."

    This is what happens when you grow a international monopoly on software and recorded entertainment (it isn't a monopoly yet, but bloody close). Happily enough one can see a reaction from (a non-activist) player: the European Union. Several measures are being taken to introduce open source solutions. This is being done both for the lower price, but also since the US has shown bad judgement in the use of the echelon system.

    • I wonder if there would be any impact in Hollywood if this message was repeated enough many times.

      Of course it would have an impact. They would spend more to fight it in Washington. Sigh.

      -

  • This looks like a job for.... (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 24, 2003 @08:51AM (#5149923)
    So. What sort of origins and superpowers will this Ip Justice group have?
    • Well, let's see... There's

      Subpoena Man (can subpoena an ISP in 2 seconds flag)

      RIAA Girl (but she's retiring from Ip Justice at the end of the year :-P)

      Movie Marauder(can bribe a congressman faster than the bostons strangler)

      Shark Man (Subpoena Man's brother, can file a lawsuit in 2 seconds flat)

      etc...

  • Related Project (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 24, 2003 @08:56AM (#5149937)
    Save your culture: http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2003/1/16/191018/961
    Save the Public Domain - Renaissance Now:
    http://lists.infoanarchy.org/mailman/listinf o.cgi/ action

    Please take the time to visit and sign up for this effort. 100+ on the mailling list so far, but we need as many as we can get. It is afterall a very ambitious project, needing extraordinary efforts to succeed.

  • Too many questions left unanswered (Score:3, Interesting)

    by HealYourChurchWebSit ( 615198 ) on Friday January 24, 2003 @09:02AM (#5149956) Homepage


    I understand what Robin Gross' group is trying to do. I'm not quite clear on how or what. Are they lobbyists, politicians. A consortium of business men and women?

    And how well funded are the. Will they be able to compete with the schrill voice of the RIAA? Will they be able to do anything in D.C.?

  • That they just won't have any impact :(

    DVD Jon was a great triumph, and now there's a risk of a retrial. Lets keep our fingers crossed, but will a group like this have any real impact? Lets hope so...

  • The rest of the world. (Score:2, Interesting)

    by frp001 ( 227227 )
    I think there are groups in Germany and France that are working hard
    So she claims! I happen to live in this part of "Old Europe", and I cannot say these groups are very vocal. If they show up I might get involved. If something like EFF exists in France, it certainly lacks publicity.

    • Re:The rest of the world. (Score:1, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Indeed.

      I happen to live in the part of the Europe that GWB would probably mistake for a one of those nice and friendly Eastern European countries if he were shown us on the map. I haven't heard of any active EFF like groups in Europe either.

    • Re:The rest of the world. (Score:4, Informative)

      by lovebyte ( 81275 ) <lovebyte2000@gmail3.1415926.com minus pi> on Friday January 24, 2003 @09:59AM (#5150230) Homepage
      You are wrong when you say they are not very vocal. But you are right if you mean you cannot hear them much.

      If you are in France, click here :eucd.info [eucd.info] (part of FSF). If you are elsewhere in old Europe, this page [eucd.info] (in French) gives you links to other country's equivalents.

      I am donating 100 good old euros. You too can help!
    • If they show up I might get involved. If something like EFF exists in France, it certainly lacks publicity

      Neither the French nor German governments are particulary interested in free speech [nytimes.com]. The fact that the US is would only discourage them from it.
      • Thanks for providing the link to a site that I had to register to be able to read.
        If you read my previous post you may notice that I was talking mainly about France. My understanding is that the bit regarding free speech mainly concerns Mr. Schröder, in which case I do not understand why you include France.
        Though I would be tempted to consider this article as biased (as is your comment: The fact that the US is would only discourage them from it.*), I would mainly put this on a cultural misunderstanding: Talking about Mr. Schröder's internationnal politics is free speech; talking about his hair dye is merely gossip and a privacy issue;this might be a subtle difference but I want it to stay this way as I do not care about:
        *Shröder's hair dye
        *Mitterand's hidden daughter
        *Clinton's cigars.
        Insinuating that the British press acts the way it does for political reasons is already according too much credit to the quality of the British press at present(BTW I happen to be half British so this is not a matter of racism)
        To come back on the main toppic according to EFF and Robin Gross it seems that US is at present the most restricting country when it comes to IP and Digital expression (please consult the yro section for further details) as Digital expression is bound to develop in the coming years that's where the focus on free speech should go, be it in the US, the EU or the rest of the world. The fact of the matter is that your are missing my point, because a stupid allusion of mine (for which I appologise) to Mr Powell comments, which is that associations supporting digital rights do not make enough publicity.
        Precisely I agree that there are free speech issues in France and the rest of Europe, and this is why I would like more publicity.

        * Regarding this comment, I have to admit I do not understand why expressing disagreements on global politic matters allows claiming that these disgreement are motivated uniquely by the fact that it comes from the US. You are being a bit egocentrical here.
        • To come back on the main toppic according to EFF and Robin Gross it seems that US is at present the most restricting country when it comes to IP and Digital expression (please consult the yro section for further details) as Digital expression is bound to develop in the coming years that's where the focus on free speech should go, be it in the US, the EU or the rest of the world.

          On the other hand, the US is the country with the environment which most encourages the development of new intellectual property. The thing most people fail to understand is that just because information can cheaply be reproduced, it does not follow that it was cheap to create. Whether you're talking a few million dollars to write a piece of software, or a few hundreds of millions to develop a new drug, it's the same: in the US, people can spend money to create knowledge, because the US will protect their opportunity to earn a return on their investment.
          • The thing most people fail to understand is that just because information can cheaply be reproduced, it does not follow that it was cheap to create. Whether you're talking a few million dollars to write a piece of software, or a few hundreds of millions to develop a new drug, it's the same: in the US, people can spend money to create knowledge, because the US will protect their opportunity to earn a return on their investment.

            There are two sides to this argument: one is that the US needs strong protection to insure investment, and the other side is that the protection cannot be so strong as to allow frivolous or otherwise unethical patents. These need to be balanced, and right now, the US seems to be leaning towards protection, without paying as much attention to protecting rights of people who are not investing. Groups like EFF and IP Justice will work to swing the scale the other way, but the result (if they are successful) is that legislation will be more balanced toward protecting the rights of all sides.
      • 1. The article you link to does not speak of France and free speech.
        2. The German cancellor asked a newspaper to not say that he dyed his hair and he could prove (allegedly) that he did not. That is a case of slender. I don't see free speech being threatened here.
        3. Finally this NYtimes editorial is particularly biased IMHO.

  • IP Justice site (Score:4, Informative)

    by Diabolical ( 2110 ) on Friday January 24, 2003 @09:21AM (#5150018) Homepage
    Here is a link to their site:

    IP Justice [ipjustice.org]

  • I wanna join IP Justice League (Score:4, Funny)

    by hrieke ( 126185 ) on Friday January 24, 2003 @09:22AM (#5150021) Homepage
    Do they have a super-duper hide out, with all sorts of cool toys to play with and fight with super villians like Jack "da Tape" Valenti and Hilary "Broken Record" Rosen, while their lacky Senator Fritz "Hollywood" Hollings does their evil bidding?

    The IP Justice League- Fighting for Truth, Justice, and the Amer... uh-oh, it appears that my lawyer is telling me that the rest of that statement is copyrighted.

  • Through the backdoor. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by oliverthered ( 187439 ) <oliverthered@hotmail. c o m> on Friday January 24, 2003 @09:24AM (#5150026) Journal
    Global IP is being umm... 'forced' on the world through the back door.
    Maybe us western countries have had strong IP for a while, but what about the majority of the world that is having western ideoligies 'forced' upon it. China, India, Africa, the middle east etc....

    Now if we can get mass linux adoption in China, India and Africa we've started to slam the door shut in international IP.
    SFAIK
    China is making there own Linux variant.
    India is adopting Linux etc....
    But there are the 'charities' that distribute 'free' software and computer equipnment to Africa

    King Faisal Charity Foundation [microsoft.com]

    computers for charities [computersf...ties.co.uk]
    • Maybe us western countries have had strong IP for a while, but what about the majority of the world that is having western ideoligies 'forced' upon it. China, India, Africa, the middle east etc

      It's nothing to do with force. If anything, it's force going the other way, from the third world back to the West. A drug company spends hundreds of millions on research to create a new drug. The cost of a drug isn't in the manufacturing, it's in the research, the trials, the FDA approval and so on. Then some third world company, hwo haven't spent a penny on research, take the drug and start mass producing it. This is a direct attack on the creators, and Western governments let them get away with it.

      You can bet that if any of these countries starts doing their own science and discovering their own drugs, they'll start wanting IP laws of their own.
      • The cost of a drug isn't in the manufacturing, it's in the research, the trials, the FDA approval and so on.

        Drugs are just like music in that they take a whole heck of a lot of marketing to be blockbusters. Look into "consulting" fees that drug co's pay doctors to prescribe the stuff, and you'll see some nasty ethics.
    • I can't wait to see what the OSS community does when completely unscrupulous companies in China, India and Africa start taking GPL code, closing the source, and selling it. I can't wait.
      • Etiher,
        provide the product that is being charged for for free. (The original GPL version)
        or
        provide the product that is being charged for for free (A coppied [pirated] version)

        How are they unscrupulous compaired to the rest of India, China and Africa?

        The Western companies that litigare are unscrupulous

  • Too late? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    It might be. In many ways we are already governed , policed, and punished, by industry. It's nothing unique, just a rolling back to the bad old days when a mining company could make a phone call and have the national guard eliminate problem employees. Stuff like that happened a lot in the old days. Companies passing their own laws is not a good sign for what the near future holds for us.

  • Where is the US economy going? Follow the money (Score:5, Insightful)

    by panurge ( 573432 ) on Friday January 24, 2003 @09:35AM (#5150064)
    If I was a congressman (in which case I wouldn't be writing this, but suppose) I would be looking at the expected future of the US economy. Technology/manufacturing or content creation.

    If the US will ultimately be a service economy producing nothing but music, software, movies and pr0n, obviously the RIAA makes the biggest noise. The US can only protect its content by enforcing its IP across the world. And, as more and more output is derivative (because increasingly everything has been done before) the rules will have to become increasingly twisted. How long before some studio lawyer tries to claim copyright over the Odyssey and the Iliad ("Homer - that's our trademarked name")? On this model, OSS is fscked along with all free content because it would destroy the new US economy. Meanwhile, the Koreans and the Chinese can make all the boxes they like but they will only do anything with the permission of the US.

    If the US believes that the future lies with technology, then OSS and free content mean that people around the world will want that technology. It doesn't matter if some Chinese film maker gets ripped off by pirate DVDs if it means that the Chinese consumer is buying a better DVD and HDTV every year or so. Yes, I'm simplifying.

    Now, as recent events are telling us, technology is dangerous, but mostly if you don't have it. (Anyone who is surprised that Saddam is trying to build serious weapons must be incredibly stupid. Would you want the US (in the form of Israel and Sa'udi) on your doorstep and no shotgun in the hall? If he doesn't have such weapons, he should be got rid of for neglecting the interests of his own country.) And...well, that applies to the US as well. Letting other people who may not like you take control of the technology you need is...unwise. Churning out boy bands and anorexic junkie singers won't protect anyone in the day when the Chinese can deploy nanoscale weapons.

    So how to protect technology? Well, once military tech led consumer tech but now it's the other way round. A dynamic consumer/medical/vehicular sector drives technological advance. So how to keep it dynamic?

    Now the historical analogy. The Roman Empire was built on military technology and excellent logistics. What grew out of it was the Catholic Church, which was based on IP (share our core beliefs and pay us money or you go to Hell - bet the RIAA would love that sanction.) And what happened? The barbarians had better military tech.

    If I was that Congressman, I'd be thinking about my grandchildren, and how a protected CD doesn't offer much in the way of security against someone with an Uzi.

    • If I was a congressman (in which case I wouldn't be writing this, but suppose) I would be looking at the expected future of the US economy. Technology/manufacturing or content creation.

      If you were a congressman, you would be far too busy worrying about your re-election prospects and campaign expenses to be bothered taking the long-term view about anything. There are no votes to be had in taking the long-term view because the voters tend to have short memory spans and are interested in immediate self-gratification.

      Eventually some nice lobbiests are going to come for a visit and explain why you should support some legislation they have purchased. They will even make a contribution to your re-election fund to help you continue with your good works (wink, wink, nudge nudge). If you don't take the money, someone else definitely will and it takes a lot of coin to fight an election these days...

      There are a few politicians out there who put their principles before their pocketbooks, but they are the exception and not the rule.
    • Let's see: your title was "Where is the US Economy going? Follow the money."



      Oh, how appropriate.



      Well, to answer that, I point you here [x-rates.com]



      I just bought something on ebay. While I waited for escrow to go through, the price climbed 5%. Need I say more?

      BTW... the barbarians did not have better tech. The story of the fall of Rome was one of corruption. The barbarians were Germanic tribes driven from their homelands by war, and looking for food. They stopped north of Italy, and sent a plea for help. The Roman senate voted to give them food, and said "come on down; we'll feed you." Then they gave a contract for providing that food to a Senator who was expected to embezzle most of the value of the contract.

      He was not as inefficient as they expected, though; he embezzled it all. So they came through, and ate all the food (picked up some gold in the process). The slaves said "No food? We know who starves first." and joined the barbarians in their sweep out of Italy in search of food. So in less than a year, Rome was cleared out of all its slaves. What remained were patricians who didn't know how to lift a fork to their lips. Thus fell Rome.

      Oh, and the Germanic tribes weren't defeated by better technology, as much as by better tactics.
      Specifically, the tactic was to defeat one tribe, and then allow them a choice: slavery, or freedom without land, if you fight the next tribe over as our front lines.

  • Splitters! (Score:4, Insightful)

    by 91degrees ( 207121 ) on Friday January 24, 2003 @10:13AM (#5150325) Journal
    This whole situation makes me think of that scene in Life of Brian, where the People's front of Judea accuse the Judean people's front and all the other variants of being splitters. Just like System V/BSD wars, and the Linux/Windows/BSD splits, it seems that geeks can't form a single contiguous organisation.

    So, we now have spearate groups, with the same goal, but no shared consensus. We have the EFF, Digital Consumer, and now IP justice, as well as Lessig and Eldred battling in their corner, as well as the European organisations.

    The result is that we have several groups all treading on each other's toes, fighting against a single unified enemy. The MPAA is the same organisation under all its names in various countries, and represents all the studios. What to we do to defeat it? We form another split!
  • IP freely?

    *ducks*

  • That's good. Now I will have a way to unload all those used MBs and HDDs in the closet once this comes into effect.

    Let see, 1K reserves should be easy to reach!

  • From the article... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by CrystalFalcon ( 233559 ) on Friday January 24, 2003 @10:28AM (#5150445) Homepage
    It's truly ironic that the United States has such an international reputation as being the leader in freedom of speech, but when it comes to intellectual property, it's actually one of the most restrictive regimes in terms of what people can do with their intellectual property.

    This is, unfortunately, blatant nonsense. Americans like to think the US has an international reputation of being "land of the free". However, the international reputation is almost the opposite -- few non-Americans regard America as particularly free. It was maybe true in the 1800s, but not today.

    To pick just one item, an international journalist organization ranked countries for relative freedom of press; the US came in... where? First or second, you'd expect; not so. Rank twenty-six. Practically all of the western hemisphere had better freedom of press.

    American is only the land of the free in the eyes of Americans themselves, so spare me references to "international reputation".

  • Dont forget to support fsf! Join now! [fsf.org]

  • The problem is lack of compromise (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Twylite ( 234238 ) <twylite&crypt,co,za> on Friday January 24, 2003 @11:34AM (#5150954) Homepage

    There seem to be three sides to the IP debate: big corporations representing huge IP interests, vocal activists representing themselves in the name of the common good, and the man in the street who doesn't really care.

    Corporate interest, unfortunately, is focused on complete control. The activists tend to focus on maintaining the status quo as it was a decade ago, or on the abolition of IP rights. And the man in the street still doesn't care, because he still wants the content, and doesn't care about the public domain as it will exist after he is dead.

    And everyone is missing the point. Protecting a work for 14 years, 50 years, 70 years or 100 years doesn't damage the public domain much, if at all. This is also within range of the time during which the creator can benefit from the work. Placing arbitrary time limits on the rights a creator enjoys will always be a difficult subject: some works will never do well, others are popular for many decades, and yet others are "ahead of their time" and may only realise their value decades after they are created.

    What damages the public domain is the growth of Copyright to cover derivative works, and the right to withhold licensing after first publication. Preventing derivatives is the most destructive, preventing creators from building on the work of others. Withholding licensing means that a work can be published initially, then withdrawn (usually because it is not profitable) and never seen for the next 70+ years.

    If we adjust Copyright law to allow the creation of derivative works after a short time (say 5 years), and force a use-it-or-lose-it scenario (where creators are forced to license published works no longer under publication to third parties on reasonable terms), we can claim back a lot of the benefit that Copyright offers to the public domain, without completely trampling over the rights of creators to the specific content that they created.

  • About Robin Gross (Score:3, Informative)

    by Infonaut ( 96956 ) <infonaut@gmail.com> on Friday January 24, 2003 @12:07PM (#5151161) Homepage Journal
    I attended a meeting of the Intellectual Property Society [ipsociety.net], at which Robin Gross spoke. She seemed very well-versed in intellectual property matters, and passionate about redressing current imbalances that favor corporate entities at the expense of us commoners. Her speech started with a brief history of IP laws in the United States, going back to the founding fathers.

    Robin illuminated the important notion that IP laws were developed *for the good of society*. That's an important item to keep in mind as we struggle back and forth with arguments about whether IP laws are supposed to protect individual inventors or big companies. In fact, they're to help the well-being of society as a whole.

    I'm glad to see that Robin has started this group, and I expect that she'll draw some talented and smart people with her.

  • Okay, this is a dumb question, but why does not someone create a computer program that puts every word combination from a-zyrian (but not in order for dictionary copyright reasons) until all 2 word combinations are found. After that 3 word combinations etcetera. As the sentences become larger, the combinations of words goes up exponentially, but then so does computer power. With distributed computing and daily copyright updates, you might be able to make the English langue public domain the same time that Aol Time Warner release the happy birthday song. If a sentence is found to be already under copy right it could be immediately removed. leaving insignificant holes, because they would be under copyright. Although this would not directly affect the computer code, It would make writing it's manual difficult. Because it would need to be a community effort, the licensing should allow reproduction for non commercial purposes only. At least, it would be a neat art project.
    • Passwordqwerty suggests creating an program to automatically generate copywritten works for the benefit of the public domain.

      As much as I like the idea, I don't think it's even marginally feasible.

      The claim is: As the sentences become larger, the combinations of words goes up exponentially, but then so does computer power.

      The exponent on the number of words in English is much bigger than the exponent for computer power. You wouldn't be able to copyright anything on the scale of even a short slashdot post, let alone anything like Shakespeare's Hamlet.

      Here's why:

      Suppose that there were only 1,000 words in English, and that we only want to store works the size of a small slashdot posting. I count 146 words in the parent post. That gives us 10^(3*146) = 10 ^ 438 combinations of words to store.

      In many countries (mine included), you need to "fix" a work in a reproducable medium to claim copyright on it. This implies that we need to store every generated work somehow, to prove our title to it, so that we can put in the public domain for everyone to enjoy.

      Let's say everyone on earth (10^10 people) helps out with one computer each. We divide by 10^10: everyone must store 10^428 combinations. We'll ignore encoding words into bits, and say that we have 10^428 bits to store.

      Suppose that everyone today can afford 100 gb of storage, and that the cost of storage halves each year. Therefore, everyone on earth will need the equivalent of 10 ^ 428 / 10 ^12 = 10 ^ 416 modern 100 gb disk drives.

      When can we afford this? Every ten years, we get about 10^3 times more storage. Dividing 416 by 3, we find that in about 138 decades, or 1,380 years, we'll finally have enough.

      To recap, in over thousand years time, with 100% worldwide pariticipation, we could place all works the size of a short paragraph, written in a tiny subset of English, into the public domain.

      This totally ignores the time it takes to generate these works, and the lawsuits that could occur if
      a work was automatically generated that infringed copyright.

      I submit that we'll have better luck trying to re-write the copyright laws within our own lifetimes.
      --
      Ytrew

  • Way too late (Score:2, Insightful)

    by salesgeek ( 263995 )
    I've already patented the application of the public relations process in Luxemborg under their somewhat unique patent laws to the novel idea of resisting intellectual property laws. Because of WIPO and several international agreements, Robin and the rest of IP Justice will have to pay royalties to engage in any of the following:

    * Releasing a press release or bulletin.
    * Announcing and holding a press conference that is seen by more that the person speaking.
    * Hosting seminars and workshops for
    * Posting a internet website that uses the HTTP (our patent was applied for in 1978) protocol.

    Anyone who attempts to use these clearly new and novel ideas will need to fill out our "Anti IP Law Business Process Licensing Request" and submit it. The application fee of $10,171.17 is non-refundable, and we reserve the right to decline any application for any reason. Because we thought of it first! (sticks out toungue and raspberries the world)

    IP laws are unjust to begin with. It's prima facia impossible to own and idea.
    $G
  • Thats my idea, you cant use it. Look at my patent. Ill sic my lawyers on you!!!

  • Left one out... (Score:3, Informative)

    by joebeone ( 620917 ) on Friday January 24, 2003 @03:49PM (#5152830) Homepage
    Our poster left out the recently formed Alliance for Digital Progress with giants like MS, Intel, Cisco, etc. that also aims to fight anti-piracy policy initiatives in the name of protecting innovation. Here's the recent news on the ADP [shorl.com]. They have no site yet, it appears...
  • Robin Gross and IP Justice
    Given /.'s tendencies, you'd think we'd be more interested in IP Freely. Which I guess is a kind of Robin... and is also Gross. Hmm.

Slashdot Top Deals

I have hardly ever known a mathematician who was capable of reasoning. -- Plato

Close