Finland Adopts New Copyright Legislation 323
Anonymous Coward writes "Finland has adopted European Union Copyright Directive with new changes to its national legislation, giving Finland one of the most record label friendly pieces of legislation in Europe. The article has a good summary of the new law's changes to the old, rather flexible legislation."
Great (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Great (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Great (Score:3, Informative)
Enough? that's not even half of the entire list.
Re:Great (Score:2, Informative)
Well you know (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Well you know (Score:5, Insightful)
More like you can't trust the EU.
The EU was sold to us as an economic union. Then we were told we needed a constitution. That the EU would guard our basic rights.
Well, thanks a lot you bastards. Thanks a lot for the corruption and injustice you've brought with you. Seems like old Finnish legislation was doing a better job until your directives forced it to change. I weep for the future.
The EU as an economic powerhouse could be a great thing. The EU as a source of bad legislation is a recipe for disaster.
Re:Well you know (Score:3, Informative)
I don't expect any successes with the EU, except for the pocket books of those with clout.
Re:Well you know (Score:3, Interesting)
"Economic powerhouse? Doesn't seem that way. Bigger governments encompassing bigger populations tend to hurt their economies in the long run with tariffs, regulations, crony favoritism and inflation."
Then why is the US so successful? I agree that bigger governments often (always?) make a mess of things, but the reason the EU will help growth is that it will open internal borders and standardize business practices/logistics across the union. If it works out...
Another problem with it is that, as humans,
Re:Well you know (Score:2, Insightful)
Funny how rather than plan to avoid the next flu pandemic, Bush seems to want to focus on how to control people with the military in opposition to standing law on using the military on U.S. soil: http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/10/05/bush.reax/i ndex.html?section=cnn_topstories [cnn.com]
Why would he want that? Are the puppetmast
Re:Well you know (Score:3, Funny)
Are you talking about this [jeffersonstate.com]? Because I have to say, that site is about as intelligent and well balanced as PETA or Fox News.
Re:Well you know (Score:5, Insightful)
Whether or not the U.S. is "so successful" depends on how you look at it. As a U.S. citizen, I'm starting to wonder how long it will be before things break down if they keep heading in their current direction. For the past century the federal government has been gaining more and more power over the states, wasting more and more resources due to the inherent inefficiencies of governing at that level, and favoring the interests of whoever has the most money to spend on lobbying - with citizens steadily becoming more disillusioned and hopeless all the while as a result.
Another problem with it is that, as humans, we always seem to standardize on whatever most people are already doing. If 5 people herding reindeer in Lapland have the best accounting methods, then the whole union should switch, not force them to change, damnit.
Yes, it's called "democracy", and like all other forms of government invented so far it has its drawbacks. Really, though, I think that governments go wrong more often as a result of trying to govern too many people and not from the system they follow (with a few exceptions like small countries that are seized by corrupt dictators).
I think Europe had a good thing going with small countries (on the same order of size as U.S. states) with governments that strike varying balances between democracy and socialism. Trying to unite them under one governing body (especially an economic one!) is just going to introduce the same problems that the U.S. is experiencing (ignoring the people's interests in favor of the interests of whoever has the most money, bureaucratic waste, gradual leeching of power away from individual countries to a self-serving centralized government, etc.)
In closing, I should mention that I'm a computer programmer and not a political activist. I'm also American so I'm probably largely ignorant about the EU situation.
Re:Well you know (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Well you know (Score:3, Insightful)
I guess I was referring to the simplistic "majority rule" definition of democracy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy [wikipedia.org]
I invoke it with a cynical connotation because we Americans tend to uphold it as some sort of ideal - with the US government as a
Re:Well you know (Score:3, Insightful)
If I wanted to, I could look like I was doing well too, if I took out all the money anyone would hand to me. Eventually though, you've got to pay the piper.
Re:Well you know (Score:4, Insightful)
After the EU formed and converted to the Euro, look how well that new currency has prospered; it's now stronger than the Dollar. Trade barriers always hurt economies; the only reason to have them is to protect your national self-interests (like keeping foreign companies from dumping and putting your domestic companies out of business, keeping stuff produced with ultra-cheap or slave labor from putting your domestic industries out of business, etc.). They make sense when there's a large disparity between trading partners because the more powerful partner wants to keep control of that, but in the case of Europe where most of the member were more or less on the same footing (labor rates, etc.), it didn't help them at all.
The problem the EU has is certainly not economic, because they're doing better and better there for the moment. Their problem is with the EU government screwing with individual countries' rights and freedoms. Just like we have different states in the USA with different laws (gambling and prostitution are legal in Nevada, but illegal most other places for instance) because the people in those regions like it that way, Europe needs to make sure their different member countries can run themselves the way they like, so the Dutch can keep their marijuana and prostitution, the Germans can keep their Autobahn with no speed limits, and the Swedes can keep www.piratesbay.com.
Re:Well you know (Score:4, Interesting)
And Europeans wonder why a lot of people in the US don't trust the idea of a world court or various other powers above the country level. Whatever happened to national sovereignty? Pretty much what every member of the EU has done has ceded a chunk of sovereignty to a government that they at best have inderect control over. If the EU is going to start demanding legislation, sounds like you should start having elections for the representatives.
Re:Well you know (Score:4, Insightful)
While I agree with many of your points, it's worth noting that the international criminal court was intended for INTERNATIONAL court cases, ie. ones for which there just is no applicable national laws (or conflicting ones; or involving countries that do not recognized applicability etc). It's not meant for overriding national laws involving only national issues. That is, things like war crimes, crimes against humanity. I mean, lots of things dictators do may actually be legal according to laws of countries they lead: not unsurprising when most laws have been (re)written by the tyrants in place. I don't think that applying national laws of the most powerful nations outside their borders (like what USA is doing, and many other bigger nations would love to, too) is much better than trying to come up with an international court that is focused on specific area where there is a vacuum.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Well you know (Score:2)
The US was sold to us as a democratic union. Then we were told we needed a constitution. That the US would guard our basic rights.
Well, thanks a lot you bastards. Thanks a lot for the corruption and injustice you've brought with you. Seems like old Native American legislation was doing a better job until your directives forced it to change. I weep for the future.
The US as an economic powerhouse could be a great thing. The US as a source of bad legislation is a recipe f
So.... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:So.... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:So.... (Score:2)
But you are saying that choosing what you put into your own body
is somehow worse than infringing on the rights of an artist to make a profit from their hard work .
Bloody prohibition
Re:So you are saying... (Score:2)
The worst people on pot do is lack the ability to realise Dave is at the door .
Re:So.... (Score:5, Interesting)
Previously I have more or less despised P2P networks, but now that the government is giving the signal that it's more OK to download an illegal copy than to apply fair use policy into stuff you've paid for, it seems like I'll have to start getting my music from illegal sources. Sure it's an offense in the new legislation too, but at least I'm not getting fined or jailed for that like I could get if I ripped a copy-protected record to my iPod.
This new legislation clearly shows what you can expect when you have the former Miss Finland as the Minister of Culture (no, I'm not kidding). I hope we can get a decent government in the next election. At least the voting statistics related to this law give us rather good guidelines on who not to vote. Meanwhile, as the government has regulated: Let the warez flow, but don't you dare to circumvent a copy protection, no matter how weak the so-called protection is.
Re:So.... (Score:4, Informative)
Only in Holland (Score:2, Informative)
Re:So.... (Score:2)
What brings in wealth to established businesses is legal, what doesn't is illegal.
Re:So.... (Score:2)
Re:So.... (Score:2)
Re:So.... (Score:2)
Re:So.... (Score:2)
Wow, the fact that you got A's in school is definitely proof that you're smart.
Banning Discussion? (Score:5, Interesting)
Or maybe not, England (as a European example) has fairly restrictive free speech laws
Re:Banning Discussion? (Score:4, Insightful)
This is ridiculous, politicians need to quit palying with the pretty colored fire.
Re:Banning Discussion? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Banning Discussion? (Score:2)
What they desire is the surpression of information that could be used to circumvent copyright. Once the illegality of such information is established, a pretext will exist to implement censorship of incoming data.
You think this information isn't dangerous to those interests that lobbied for this law?
Re:Banning Discussion? (Score:2)
Re:Banning Discussion? (Score:2, Insightful)
Not that I agree with Finland's action, what human rights could you use as an argument to being able to bypass DRM's? Doesn't this just come back to if you don't like it don't buy it? When I think Human Right's I think of "The United Nations Agreements on Human Rights". When you have conventions like protection against torture, whining about DRM's just seems so (for lack of a better word) petty.
UN Agreement on Human Rights (Score:5, Insightful)
That's what happens when people read the document [hrweb.org] you try to use to refute their point.
Re:UN Agreement on Human Rights (Score:2, Informative)
Re:UN Agreement on Human Rights (Score:3, Insightful)
Your rationalization fails the laugh test. If that kind of arbitrary limit on assembly were allowed then there would be no teeth to the article at all. For example:
You can assemble, you just can't assemble and discuss civil rights abuses
You can assemble, you just can't assemble and discuss government corruption
You can assemble, you just
Re:Banning Discussion? (Score:2)
Hmmm...ever read their tabloids?
Re:Banning Discussion? (Score:2)
It's an honest question, BTW.
Re:Banning Discussion? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Banning Discussion? (Score:2)
Re:Banning Discussion? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Banning Discussion? (Score:2)
Oh, I don't know. They've shown them selves capable of steely resolve in the face of overwhelming pressure not to, say, launch a war of aggression against an oil rich nation. Or in defending the profits of overseas corporation from the best interests of the electorate, for example.
Corrupt, venal, deluded, increasingly paranoid, cynical, self serving... there are so many adjectives I'd consider before I resorted to "weak".
Re:Banning Discussion? (Score:2)
While I may not like racist speach, it is still a restriction on what you can say. Last time I checked I could call another person in the US anything I liked without getting arrested.
Re:Banning Discussion? (Score:3, Interesting)
Keep up with the news -- it's 3 months without trial now for people who annoy police officers, and if you don't object to that (nobody can) then it will soon increase.
Fair trials? They're some historical thing, like catholocism and Archery practise...
World Wide Government (Score:4, Insightful)
Are there any legitimate governments (not owned by the MNCs) left at all?
It seems Finland is as bad or worse than my own (US) government. Very sad.
Re:World Wide Government (Score:3, Funny)
Re:World Wide Government (Score:2)
Re:World Wide Government (Score:2)
No - sorry. My investment company has spent a great deal of time and money on this technology and in acquiring and carefully placing these assets for our most valued clients. If you wanted your own you should have done something about it years ago. And don't think that you can steal any of our property by simply picking up the phone and saying, "Mr. Bush?... Mr. George Bush?... Mr. George Walker Bush?..." - for example. It won't work
Re:World Wide Government (Score:3, Interesting)
As evidenced by a spectrum of perso
Abdication of Responsibility (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Abdication of Responsibility (Score:3, Insightful)
Letting a government pass a law that encompasses a certain ability to do something on the basis that they've argued they won't use it is quite worrying.
There must be more to this.
Re:Abdication of Responsibility (Score:2)
In my part of the world we use laws like these to persecute individuals we find personally offensive while the rest of the populace gets off with a free pass
Re:Abdication of Responsibility (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Abdication of Responsibility (Score:2)
Re:Abdication of Responsibility (Score:2)
Who knows, may be they passed a law to make it possbile!
Selective Enforcement (Score:5, Insightful)
Expect the "we won't persue copying" claims, in practice, to mean that people will continue pirating, everyone will continue pirating, but only those who politically are the enemies of the record labels will be singled out for it. Want to download the entire Led Zeppelin song catalog, in clear and obvious violation of law? No one will stop you. Want to create an innovative new software program which could change the way music is distributed, but which incidentally could maybe be used to pirate music? Prepare to have the copyright directive, and tens of thousands of dollars in legal bills, come down on your head.
Ayn Rand's said exactly one lucid thing in her entire disastrous body of work, and it was this:
Re:Selective Enforcement (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Abdication of Responsibility (Score:2)
Holy crap... (Score:3, Funny)
Why are you glad? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Why are you glad? (Score:2)
Dunno how you got that. He essentially said "I'm glad that didn't happen to me," not "I'm glad that happened to you." Pretty substantial difference there.
It's like if a rock falls on you, while I may certainly
Re:Why are you glad? (Score:2)
Re:Why are you glad? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Why are you glad? (Score:2)
Regarding your half-assed attempt at a point, it's quite obvious anyone with a brain, be him or her liberal, conservative, libertarian, socialst, etc., that the Iraq and Afghanistan invasions were not and are not about freedom, nor democracy, nor liberty.
Re:Why are you glad? (Score:2)
It was only during the cold war that we started to think that the ends justify the means - prop up a dictator to keep communism out. A globalised economy also encourages this type of thinking be
Re:Holy crap... (Score:4, Insightful)
"This actually makes me glad to be an american... for the first time in a while..."
Do you remember where all this neo-copyright bullshit started? Do you remember what corporations lobbied the EU to pass this legislation?
Re:Holy crap... (Score:2)
Re:Holy crap... (Score:2)
Why? Because the current US government's inefficiency somehow makes up for it's destructiveness? The US government is moving in the same direction; It just takes it longer to get there.
Copyrights? What happened to democratic rights? (Score:2, Insightful)
Is it just me or is the tendency of so-called "democratic" governments to make laws that seem to please big companies and p-off just about everybody else seem very "undemocratic"? I wonder if people are forgetting it's their rights they ought to be defending, not defending big companies against citizens wanting to exercise their right to make a copy of a CD or DVD they bo
The problem is... (Score:2)
Corporations = Money = Ads = Getting (re)elected
Any surprise they cater to corporations and not invididuals?
No, the real problem is... (Score:2, Insightful)
See, the logical answer to your question is: but don't we vote? And if all the money in the world didn't change our minds, wouldn't the money then be worthless? The only problem is that no one is going to vote on DRM alone. Unfortunately, the issues are what the media says they are. The media is swayed by that money, and also by the fact that they sort of naturally line right up with the MPAA and RIAA, just by nature of their industry. So, the real probl
Re:No, the real problem is... (Score:2)
In the long run, money *is* worthless. Afterall, it is a created concept used to control the masses.
At some point, the masses won't have any money to spend, and the greedy corporations will demand handouts from the governments, but the government won't have any tax revenue. Result: global economic collapse. But in the meantime, the corporations are going to attempt to get theirs before it's too late.
It's nice to see (Score:3, Interesting)
More information here (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.effi.org/tekijanoikeus/laki/index.en.h
whoops... (Score:5, Interesting)
there goes Linux... a wet dream for Microsoft... getting Linux outlawed...
and there goes the entire point of owning a personal MP3 player... now the users will have to purchase any music specifically for that player, even if they already have it on CD...
Re:whoops... (Score:2)
I think they'll allow "industry approved" devices to copy the tracks. At that point, it's not copy protection but cartel protection. Why can some companies make stuff that can copy it but others can not?
Re:whoops... (Score:2)
Where the hell do you get that notion? DeCSS is not a part of Linux.
Re:whoops... (Score:4, Interesting)
there goes Linux...
How so? Windows "allows circumventing copy protection mechanisms" just as much as Linux does, in that neither of them currently attempt to prevent it.
If the law outlaws Linux, it also outlaws Windows (and BSD, Solaris, etc).
and there goes the entire point of owning a personal MP3 player
Here in the UK, it is technically illegal to format-shift content - that is, it is technically illegal for me to rip my legally-purchased CDs to mp3 to play on my iRiver. It doesn't stop anyone, no-one has ever been sued for it and you know what? No-one's ever *going* to be sued for it either. That doesn't make it right, of course, but it does make it something to not bother worrying about (there's already plenty enough of that sort of thing as it is)
Re:whoops... (Score:3, Insightful)
Actually, it makes it wrong in a fundamental way. You can check all the Ayn Rand quotes [slashdot.org] elsewhere in this discussion about one problem with it.
I guess I am different to you. I object strongly to things that are fundamentally wrong as a matter of principle. Not enforcing old laws that have been rendered irrelevant by the passage of time is one thing. But instituting new laws that they claim will not be enforced i
Hide those Sharpies! (Score:4, Informative)
So if some particular copy protection is totally shitty and is defeated by common items, those common items suddenly become contraband?
Re:Hide those Sharpies! (Score:2)
this is f***ing goofy! (Score:2)
Dejà wow! So, this legislation looks the same as that being passed around in the United States. Again, the gist is the consumer taking any actions on their own in fair-use context (not sure that exists there, but I'm assuming) could be accused of violating these proposed laws.
And, again, I see nothing in these proposed laws that are ensuring protection for the artists. All references seem to indicate protection of music labels , something quite different than artists.
Aside:
Psychiatrist: So, Mick
This law sux. (Score:5, Interesting)
This made my future voting decision simple.
Christian democratic party and Nationalists(Perussuomalaiset) where ONLY parties which all voted against the law.
Re:This law sux. (Score:3, Insightful)
Implications for hardware could be severe... (Score:5, Funny)
So, I guess this means the new Finnish keyboard will be without a "Shift" key.
Re:Implications for hardware could be severe... (Score:3, Funny)
Anyone using Windows should now format the drive containing the tool of evil...
Fatality (Score:5, Funny)
Judge: Finnish him!
Demonstration meant nothing (Score:5, Interesting)
But... (Score:3, Funny)
Lost faith in Finland - We're Screwed (Score:5, Informative)
As a Finn, I have always taken pride in our country - even though we don't have things like the Bill of Rights, we have our fundamental rights, and our copyright legislation isn't at least as horrible as the DMCA. Well, that has now changed. Finland has enjoyed #1 position in international competitiveness ratings and has been considered a vanguard of the spearhead of information age societies, but this piece of legislation has now set us back years, nay, perhaps even decades.
What wrenches my gut is that despite Finland's top rating when it comes to low corruption, shenaniganry in creating and passing this piece of legislation has been plentiful. The law was prepared in the Ministries of Culture and Education in close rapport with people who work for the very organisations that lobby for stricter controls on what citizens can do with the things they have bought. When sixty-six expert statements were collected on the law, only one was from a consumer-oriented organisation, that being EFFI [effi.org].
Its passing was surrounded by nothing but smoke and mirrors, with misleading statements based on intentionally erroneus interpretations of the already-muddy law by its supporters. And finally when a demonstration was arranged [solitudo.net] in front of the Parliamentary building on Tuesday, when the bill was discussed for the very last time, a representative of a musicians' organisation was put on the wires stating the demonstrators' cry for free speech was tarnishing the concept for free speech because the demonstrators just want to download songs in its name. This while behind him people were touting DeCSS signs and spreading out short DeCSS programmes on flyers with the text "distributing this flyer will become illegal".
Not to mention the EEA statute, which makes distributing works not published in the European Economic Area illegal in the EEA, unless they have been acquired for personal use. No more import manga from stores if the publisher overseas decides that the market in Finland is too small.
Well, now there's a galvanised group of a few hundred people who are just really pissed off. We're already setting up forums for "organised discussion" and thinking up ways to turn ourselves in en masse to swamp the system. The Parliament has made an initial decision to modify the law later on, but until then, we'll have to just suck it up.
And guess who used her authority to press the bill through no matter what? The Minister of Culture, a former Miss Finland, whose only merit in getting into Parliament was that she was Miss Finland, and whose only merit in getting into the Ministry was that she raked in so many votes. No, I didn't vote for her.
Finally, what comes to the EU directive garbage, it was just an attempt to deflect blame by the Government. There is only an alleged record of a single EU official stating how tightly the EUCD should be implemented. Finland now has the strictest EUCD implementation in existence. Greece implemented it with most of the stupid parts axed out; a French court has now declared that copy protection (more like "use restriction") has no protection of law. DVD area codes are illegal in Belgium. The only thing the EU directive argument served was the populist and anti-EU True Finns party.
Oh FFS. I think I'll just move to Canada. Bonjour Monsieur, ca va bien, eh?
And there's more (Score:5, Informative)
The More Things Change (Score:4, Insightful)
Orwell was right, gang. The government is not under our control, we are under its. Our every step, and every breath, is monitored from birth thru death by our corporate overlords thru credit cards, phone bills, Tivos, and spyware. Free speech is censored by Google, Yahoo, and others. The openness of the Internet is a lie spread by ISP's who advertise huge bandwidths but close down anyone who actually tries to use it. 1984 was filled with dim-witted, ham-fisted amateurs, compared to the real world.
Re:The More Things Change (Score:2)
perhaps you've heard of Rosa Parks?
Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. -Martin Luther King Jr.
and please, no childish arguments comparing "digital" issues with civil rights being absurd... if you have more than 1 active working brain cell you can see that yourself.
laws not in the interest of the public, deserve no respect. - ME.
If they'd done this 15 years ago... (Score:2)
Re:Extremely Disturbing (Score:2)
More of a clarification than a correction:
It's not tools that 'circumvent' copyright, it's tools that circumvent a 'technological measure that effectively controls access to a coprytighted work.' And it's also illegal not just to distribute them, b