Slashdot Mirror


Euro DMCA Fails

Kr3m3Puff writes "Looks like the Euro DCMA has failed according to Yahoo! It seems that only two member nations had adopted the local law and therfore the Euro wide law will not be adopted. The BSA is complaining they have no protections." Update: 12/23 17:50 GMT by T : That's DMCA rather than DCMA -- silly acronyms.

240 comments

  1. Well.. by unterderbrucke · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    why won't they protect their own companies from their property being stolen?

    1. Re:Well.. by Zeinfeld · · Score: 3, Informative
      why won't they protect their own companies from their property being stolen?

      It is somewhat a mark of the polarization of this issue that a comment like that gets moderated as Troll.

      Of course the issue for the EU parliaments is protecting property. Don't project from the corruption of the US Congress where this issue is decided with multi-million dollar bribes make you think that all countries are like that. The US is an aberation in that regard. While campaign contributions occasionally influence policies in Europe the blatant influence peddling simply does not exist. Politicians do not collect campaign contributions directly, their parties do. That makes a big difference on issues of this sort.

      Reading the story I have to think that it was created by the BSA. The statements made simply do not add up.

      It seems very unlikely that the EU council of ministers would issue a directive in April requiring legislative action by the end of the year. National parliaments are not merely a rubber stamp for EU directives, no matter how hard the BSA tries to make that claim. None of the European parliaments work at that pace. Legislation in the UK typically takes a minimum of two years and the legislative year starts in the autum. Time in the legislative calendar is very scarce and the idea that the government would allow Brussels to direct it to prioritize an IP bill is somewhat interesting.

      This is just a story created by a self important industry association as a way of trying to keep an issue alive. They probably realise that the tide is starting to run against them and that unless they get their way soon they will have to make concessions and may not get their way at all.

      --
      Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
      Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
  2. Surprised ... by LizardKing · · Score: 2

    When I read the article I expected Britain to be one of the two that implemented similar legislation. I was quite surprised to find that our IT illiterate politicians missed another chance to cock things up.

    Chris

    1. Re:Surprised ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would like to publicly thank my MP (think senator if you are from the US) who forwarded the email I wrote to him on to the UK secretary of state for trade and industry and made my voice heard at the highest applicable level (yes I got a reply from her). As a result of the political process working, enough people seemed to get their voice heard and we do not have the DMCA style problems that enflict the US. The fax your MP website provided by the NTK guys is truly great so thanks all round :)

    2. Re:Surprised ... by donutello · · Score: 2

      From reading the article it did not sound as if the UK had made a final decision on the subject:

      The United Kingdom's Patent Office issued a statement on its Web site saying it was still considering a variety of view points on the matter and would endeavor to implement the directive by March 31, 2003.


      Sounds more like the bill is still with the Patent Office which is figuring out the minutae before sending it to parliament to be voted upon.

      --
      Mmmm.. Donuts
    3. Re:Surprised ... by yogi · · Score: 1
      Strangley enough, the politicians had very little to do with it. After the Media agencies had got the EUCD passed in without anyone noticing, the UK and other member states were bound to amend their laws.


      The job actually fell to the Patent Office to draft the legislation, and it would have been passed as a statutory instrument. That is, parliament would not have had a look in. In addition, due to "lack of time", none of the optional safegaurds available in the EUCD would have been implemented


      The law has been delayed in the UK, mostly because people did fax their MP's and got them on board.


      This pressure needs to be kept up. As it stands the UK DMCA legislation is far worse than the US one, since we do not have the concept of "fair use", in UK law, or any of the other exemptions that the DMCA provides.

    4. Re:Surprised ... by Nex · · Score: 0

      an MP is not the equivalent of a US Senator, it's the equivalent of a Representative. Our Senate is like your House of Lords, exacpt that all Senators are elected. Nex

    5. Re:Surprised ... by langed · · Score: 1
      When I read the article, I just couldn't get over the subliminal troll...

      Francisco Mingorance, European policy director for the Business Software Alliance (BSA)
      Now, that guy's name was seen repeatedly in the article in its last-name-only form. Compare:
      Mingorance and Mignorance.

      When I read portions of the article aloud to the family, I had trouble NOT saying "'em ignorants."
      Imagine a redneck saying that name: "'Francisco? 'em Ignorants!"
      (And just how far is San Francisco from HollyWood? Or even Silicon Valley?)

      All that said, considering the fact that CD prices never seemed to fall from the ~US$16 that they started at, and that the artists only get about US$.04 per copy, and the manufacturing costs around US$2/disc, that leaves some US$13.96 per copy that goes into the deep pockets of the RIAA. That's over 87%! No doubt at least some of that goes to support the BSA. That leads me to a new parsing of this acronym, which seems to be a rather common sentiment here on Slashdot:(Greedy) Bastards Suck Ass!

    6. Re:Surprised ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They are currently working their way through the many "high quality" submissions from the public on the issue.

      So keep it up everyone.

    7. Re:Surprised ... by TomServo · · Score: 2, Informative

      As much as I hate to give ammunition to the pro RIAA/record company crowd, I think you've left out a number of costs in your list.

      I don't know the actual dollar amounts, so I can't tell you how much it adds to the $2.04 you've already stated, but I'm sure that it's at least a couple more dollars.

      Just off the top of my head (I don't work in the industry, but I can imagine that these would be involved): Distribution costs, Advertising costs (including TV & Radio ads for the biggest ones, plus getting your record played on major radio stations, press junkets, etc etc etc), production costs (renting/owning a studio, producers, mixers, equipment that goes along with all that)...

      There are tremendous costs involved with creating, distributing, and promoting an album. I have a friend who's been struggling with her own album, producing her own CDs, and trying to get promoted in Los Angeles. She's gotten some promotion from a DJ here in LA that's been promoting a lot of female artists in the area, but it's been a good year-year and a half since the CD was released, and I think it's still a money-losing effort.

      There's a lot more to it than that $2.04. Despite that, I agree that the RIAA still is greedy, just not to the point that you claim. I also agree that they are doing everything they can to destroy our fair use rights, and they need to be fought on every front, especially the political one. They may have lots of money, but if the populace can be educated, votes are still more powerful than money.

    8. Re:Surprised ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Since when are wild assumptions/assertions ammunition for anyone? The *real* costs for manufacturing and distribution are minimal. That doesn't stop the vendors selling manufacturing and distribution services to smaller artists from gouging though.

      Some of my favorite artists now sell their CDs directly over the internet. If you want the newest CD, you have to buy it from them directly. Of course, the prices aren't any lower, but at least the artist gets to keep most of the money.

    9. Re:Surprised ... by MamasGun · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yeah, but guess who gets stuck with those costs? Not the record companies. It's the ARTIST.

      --
      "But you've already got a DVD. It lasts forever....In the digital world, we don't need back-ups..."
      -- Jack Valenti
    10. Re:Surprised ... by tomhudson · · Score: 2
      $2.? I don't think so. In the mid-ninetys, Corel was quoted on how purchasing WordPefect was such a win because "the software was already developed, and it cost less than a buck to press each CD". That's a buck Canadian, about $0.64 USD. And costs have come down since. Ask AOL. It's around $0.05 - $0.10 per copy now for the CDs. The stupid jewel case and liner notes cost more than the CD itself now.

      That said, I agree, fuck the BSA, fuck the ??AA, etc. They've been screwing the public, and their clients, for decades. Amazing they haven't all died of AIDS (after all, you can't screw a couple hundred million people and NOT pick up something deadly) :-)

  3. What's DCMA? by Billy+the+Mountain · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Digital Copyright Millenium Act?

    --
    That was the turning point of my life--I went from negative zero to positive zero.
    1. Re:What's DCMA? by elmegil · · Score: 2, Funny

      You have just violated my digital copyright on the word "millennium, established by the Digital Copyright 'Millennium' Act. And you misspelled it to boot. Shame on you.

      --
      7 November 2006: The day Americans realized corruption and incompetence weren't addressing 11 September 2001
    2. Re:What's DCMA? by MrLint · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Thank you for joining slashdot. We have lots of wonderful activites for you here at slashdot. Enjoy "Living under a rock" and "read the article". Every friday at dusk we also have a "Lamer roast" freaturing only thebest seasoned LARTs! Please tell all your friends about club /.

    3. Re:What's DCMA? by TomServo · · Score: 1

      Psst! The bill is called the "DMCA", that's what the comment was about! Pass it on!!

  4. Spellcheck! by TheSHAD0W · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Shouldn't that be "DMCA"?

    1. Re:Spellcheck! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, come on! It's slashdot.

    2. Re:Spellcheck! by Zildy · · Score: 1, Redundant

      Doh...no wonder why it fell, everybody spells it wrong.

      "In Euro news, few nations have adopted the DMCA."

      "In other news, Euro nations have caught DCMA-FEVER! 'We can't keep it on the shelves' says one DCMA dealer."

      --
      Karma: Excer..ex...excellahhh...realll good (mostly affected by drinking not done in moderation)
    3. Re:Spellcheck! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's what is misleading about the article. It turns out the DMCA was adopted unanimously, while a few members of the EU adopted the DCMA as well.

    4. Re:Spellcheck! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Here is how you can remember how it's spelt:

      D.M.C.A

      A Parody by Dave

      Sung to Y.M.C.A. by the Village People

      Young man, there's no need to feel down.
      I said young man, this law is good.
      I said young man, it helps the MPAA
      There's no need to hack at all now

      Young man, do away with mp3
      I said young man, don't decode that DVD
      If you do now, I'm sure you will find
      The F-B-I breaking down your door

      You will be busted under the D-M-C-A
      You will be busted under the D-M-C-A

      They will take everything from you,
      Say bye to your boxen and hard disks...

      You will be busted under the D-M-C-A
      You will be busted under the D-M-C-A

      http://whichwayup.org/writing/ymca/

  5. Hmmm... by rickthewizkid · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Now when will the USA version fall?

    Or, when can I move to europe? :)
    -RickTheWizKid

    1. Re:Hmmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      hey you can move now if you want.
      us version fail? well thatll be whenever the copytheft industries run out of money(never)

    2. Re:Hmmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The DMCA can only fall if campaign finance reform gets teeth.

  6. offtopic..re: home page by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    that has to be the most brilliant idea for the WTC towers I've seen!

  7. Netherlands, here I come... by MamasGun · · Score: 1

    Good...Holland didn't pass the EuroDMCA. Amsterdam and Utrecht are cold this time of year, but the chill in the US is a bit harder to take. Screw the BSA...those thugs Deserve To Lose.

    --
    "But you've already got a DVD. It lasts forever....In the digital world, we don't need back-ups..."
    -- Jack Valenti
    1. Re:Netherlands, here I come... by jhol · · Score: 1

      Oh come on, we all know that the only reason you have for moving to the Netherlands and Amsterdam is because you want to visit the Coffee Shops and purchase grass legally.

    2. Re:Netherlands, here I come... by Corporate+Troll · · Score: 1
      You are forgetting the cute dutch chicks, and they have a really low age of consent! ;-) Of course my abuse of weed probably impairs my vision.

      OT: I was really surprised to see Denmark as one of the two countries that signed the treaty. I thought they were more open-minded. But this probably is just a first battle,.. that EuroDCMA will come back to haunt us. Where do I sign to stop it?

    3. Re:Netherlands, here I come... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Enjoy the taxes!

    4. Re:Netherlands, here I come... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dont let the door hit you on the ass on the way out!

    5. Re:Netherlands, here I come... by phulshof · · Score: 2, Informative

      Well, one of the reasons for the delay has been the crisis in (read: fall of) the Dutch government. The Dutch implementation has already been through several rounds of review though, and it'll probably be up for discussion in the 2nd Chamber pretty soon after the elections in January. As I'm very much involved in these discussions I'll keep you posted on the progress...

    6. Re:Netherlands, here I come... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yeah.. 19.5% sales tax..
      As if the original price of software / movies / CD's isn't bad enough..
      I guess that's why Linux is popular..

      Please no cheap Dutch jokes today ;-)

  8. Thank $deity for that... by RMH101 · · Score: 5, Informative
    I thought this was a foregone conclusion after David Blunkett et al's usual draconian bills.

    For all UK readers, this is probably a good idea to publicise http://www.faxyourmp.org - a very quick, easy and above all *free* way to get a digitally-signed paper fax to your local MP from a webpage.

    Shout loudly or lose yet more digital rights...

    1. Re:Thank $deity for that... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Down with *all* stone-age nazis. I don't care if its a religion, and not a group, club, company, charity. Backwards muppet bullshit is just that.

  9. well if the legistlators thought.. by peculiarmethod · · Score: 2

    if the pockey-boys to legislators [in america see lobbyist] thought all the countries with little to no money flowing in from the very source this ridiculous serious of laws aim to protect profits would just adopt these strict, un-adaptable laws that suppress creativity and limit personal rights.. they're either crazy or blinded by their ultra greed.

    oh yeah..

    pm

    --
    ** "It's not my job to stand between the people talking to me, and the ones listening to me." -- Pego the Jerk
  10. hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I either want to make a joke about "DCMA" instead of "DMCA", or I want to say "the BSA can go the fuck to hell" in a funny Jeff.K sort of dialect.

    I think I'll choose the latter, here we go:

    TEH bsa CAN GO TEH FUXX0R TO HEL!!!!1

  11. BSA Complains? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Why would the Boy Scouts of America want extra protection in Europe?

    (Posted anonymously for my protection.)

    1. Re:BSA Complains? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      (Posted anonymously for my protection.)
      why its not like you admited to being a boyscout mole^^^^leader.

    2. Re:BSA Complains? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because puns are tetchy things. You never know if they're going to be Funny, Offtopic or Troll.

      Not to give anyone ideas to modding it down, though maybe we can get my bad acronymic pun the most moderations this week. I have Goals.

  12. Mildly amusing side note by idontgno · · Score: 5, Funny
    " "It's a bit disappointing," Francisco Mingorance, European policy director for the Business Software Alliance (BSA) trade group told Reuters on Monday."

    At a quick glance, you could read the BSA mouthpiece's name as "Ignorance".

    No, I don't have anything useful to add to the discussion; I just wanted to mock the name of the Mouth of Sauron.

    --
    Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
    1. Re:Mildly amusing side note by apweiler · · Score: 1

      At a quick glance, you could read the BSA mouthpiece's name as "Ignorance".

      I actually did.

      I quite often pretty much ignore the names of people like this, so when I read 'Mingorance said ... ' later in the article, I thought 'Ignorance said? Doesn't compute... oh, it says 'Mignorance said' - they even misspelled it! Ah, it's Mingorance. Must be some kind of spokesperson or whatever.'

  13. Wrong by KilljoyAZ · · Score: 5, Informative

    Reading the article one finds the hasn't failed, it just won't be in place in time for 2003. There's nothing stopping these countries from adopting the law in the future.

    And for the last time, it is DMCA, not DCMA!

    --
    This .sig is currently on hiatus for retooling.
    1. Re:Wrong by nusuth · · Score: 2, Informative

      No, the article says the deadline has passed so it won't be an EU wide law.

      --

      Gentlemen, you can't fight in here, this is the War Room!

    2. Re:Wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So we won't be hearing this from you again? ;)

    3. Re:Wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sadly that is not how the EU works. Some laws takes years upon years after having been decided upon to be created in the various nations, but in the end, everyone really is obliged to put them into effect.

    4. Re:Wrong by Moritz+Moeller+-+Her · · Score: 2

      Bullshit many directives are not implemented in national European laws. What happens then?

      Easy: The directive becomes law by itself if applicable and/or -- as software producer -- you can sue any nation that has failed to implement the directive for any damages.

      Basically people who have no clue of the European Union (like CmdrTaco, Kr3m3Puff ...) should reacd up on the legal system we have here.

      --
      Moritz
    5. Re:Wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And for the last time, it is DMCA, not DCMA!
      naw, they're trying to copyright everything.
      it's the Digital "Copyright the Millenium" Act

    6. Re:Wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Damn, I thought it was YMCA.

      No DMCA spoof song yet? awww....

    7. Re:Wrong by Wizord · · Score: 1

      I'm not completely sure of that. The Directive goes automatically local law only if that point is explicitly provided on the Directive itself.

      AFAIK that's not the case. This Directive was intended to be an Amendment on local laws and thus failing to implement it simply maintains the previous law running.

      Oh, BTW I'm also an European (Spanish, actually). IANAL anyway.

      --
      Regards, Wizord.
  14. crafty by k3v0 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    it's smart of the EU member nations to look to the model that the US has set and the problems surrounding implemetation of these laws

  15. The DMCA is pretty ineffective anyway... by Valar · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Sure, the RIAA and MPAA and their buddies in the government have tried to apply the DMCA to every aspect of life, but if you look at how it is being enforced, versus how it could be enforced it really isn't that bad. Afterall, they could break your door down, tear gas your dog, spray you in the face with pepper spray then push you down the stairs for DMCA violation...or at least that's what they told me.

    1. Re:The DMCA is pretty ineffective anyway... by MrLint · · Score: 1

      The BSA has *NO* protection.. OMG! what a travesty! they cant go and sue anyone actually pirating their software! They cant have counterfitters arrested! What kinda communist utopia is it over in europe!

    2. Re:The DMCA is pretty ineffective anyway... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That .sig is overrated.

    3. Re:The DMCA is pretty ineffective anyway... by deaddrunk · · Score: 1

      The one where you can walk home at 3am and not be shot.

      --
      Does a Christian soccer team even need a goalkeeper?
    4. Re:The DMCA is pretty ineffective anyway... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What would be the point of shooting you?

      You already don't have a life.

    5. Re:The DMCA is pretty ineffective anyway... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When Federal Agents come to arrest you, THEY NEVER DO IT GENTLY.

    6. Re:The DMCA is pretty ineffective anyway... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, horsefeathers! Tell that to Jon Johanson or to the staff of 2600! Tell that to Dmitry Sklyarov after he had to spend some quality time with the FBI and go through a trial. Tell that to HUNDERDS of people so far, who have had jackbooted terror troops of the Content Nazi, breakdown their door and get hauled of to jail with all of their computer equipment taken away. Tell that to the system admins at universaries who the Content Nazi's have drafted into their army to block file trading or ISP who turn over at the first sign of Imperial Stormtroopers at the door.

      The DMCA is the second biggest attack on your personal freedom after the Patriot Act. Millions have not been affected but your turn may come. And there ain't none of us free unless all of us are free.

      Hell, I probably made the UltraCarnivore list for this post.

      All Hail Big Brother!

    7. Re:The DMCA is pretty ineffective anyway... by slipgun · · Score: 2

      The one where you can walk home at 3am and not be shot.

      But don't try defending yourself in any way, or you'll find yourself getting at least 10 years on a murder charge.

      --
      SpamNet - a spam blocker that really works
    8. Re:The DMCA is pretty ineffective anyway... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ah, but that's the difference between a JUSTICE system and a LEGAL system.

      In the US, justice doesn't enter into it... it's all about who has the most money/celebrity/etc... it's got nothing to do with the TRUTH. It's very true that in america, ANYTHING can be bought... you do it all the time with your government and your so-called "justice" system.

  16. Boo Hoo for the BSA by FreeLinux · · Score: 5, Funny

    I feel really sorry for them. How ever will they enforce their policies without this bill? Especially with half of Europe switching to Linux, the BSA rapidly approaches obsolescence.

    We'll miss them, won't we?

    1. Re:Boo Hoo for the BSA by moncyb · · Score: 2

      No, the FSF will hire them to enforce the GPL. ;-)

  17. Rejoice! by WPIDalamar · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You guys sure are lucky over there to have politicians that can actually think without being prompted by big-business. Go EU!

    1. Re:Rejoice! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you then saying that Bill Clinton, who signed the DMCA into law was being influenced by big business?

    2. Re:Rejoice! by tomhudson · · Score: 2
      And what about what happens when Canada enters into a free-trade-zone agreement with the EU?

      This link points to the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade (Trade Negotiations) Canada. link

      Will there be "harmonization" between Canada's laws and the EU, so that the BSA, RIAA, MPAA, etc. will look to the great white north in fear and trembling (more than they already do, since we're "stealing" so many jobs in the entertainment industry already)?

    3. Re:Rejoice! by JensChr · · Score: 2, Insightful

      They are not thinking, they are just slow...
      The infosoc directive is (unfortunately) not stopped, they just did not make it national laws within the agreed deadline.
      Once the EU has agreed upon the directive, the member countries cannot decide not to implement it.

    4. Re:Rejoice! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, Clinton was the most pro-big business president in history.

    5. Re:Rejoice! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd suspect he was influenced by big cannabis... ie, the spliff him and his brother, George were burning that day.

  18. There's no point to this article... by doctomoe · · Score: 5, Informative

    Whether the countries have or have not implemented the Directive's text into local law does not matter. As soon as a Directive is published, it has an obligatory effect in all of the EU countries, whether it's implemented or not. So in short, in a lawsuit, any of the parties can take advantage of the Directive and the local judge will have to respect it, even if it is in opposition with the local law.

    1. Re:There's no point to this article... by paugq · · Score: 3, Informative

      I'm sorry, but you are wrong.

      A directive per-se it's a bit more than nothing. The EU works this way: the European Council or the European Parliament dictate a directive and give the EU members a deadline to implement ("transpose") it. Every member must transpose the directive, but there's always a transient period (monthes or even years) until the directive gives shape to a country-specific law. While this transient period, the directive has no effect. The point here is this: a directive is not a law and won't be used by a judge.

      Kuro5hin carried an interesting article explaining what's the EU and how it works

    2. Re:There's no point to this article... by doctomoe · · Score: 2, Informative
      No, I am right :) It's true that a Directive has no effect given to it by the EU Treaty, but the EU Court has decided since 1970 that a Directive which has not been implemented or has been badly implemented has a direct effect for all EU countries once the deadline has passed.

      SACE (17 december 1970, ruling 33/70, rec. 1213)
      Van Duyn (4 december 1974, ruling 41/74, rec. 1337)

      I have studied EU law for 2 years, I know what I am talking of.

    3. Re:There's no point to this article... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative
      ...the EU Court has decided since 1970 that a Directive [...] has a direct effect for all EU countries once the deadline has passed.

      Yes. For the countries themselves, which means they can be held liable if they don't implement it.

      Local countries' criminal justice law is something different entirely. You can't be held responsible for a law that may or may not exist, which is why you can't be prosecuted under a law until it has become law. A directive is not a law, it's an obligation to pass something into law.

      For instance, in Belgium the law dictates that any law that a Belgian has to conform to has to be published in an official magazine. European laws aren't published there, so I can't be held responsible if I break one.

    4. Re:There's no point to this article... by mijok · · Score: 1

      Nope he's right. You might remember the news how every time a new country has a referendum whether to join or not the "No" has distributed enormous amounts of material on how the EU legislation overrides national legislation. You can always appeal to the EU courts if you're unhappy with decisions made by the national ones. So basically:
      - One stupid decision by a national judge.
      - Appeal to EU court.
      - Decision according to EU legislation.
      - Nobody is stupid enough to test the national legislation vs. the EU one again.
      - Directive enforced nationally. Voila!

      --
      Karma. Moderation. Is my .sig good now?
    5. Re:There's no point to this article... by doctomoe · · Score: 2, Informative

      EU law is published in the EU Official Journal, which is sufficient. And a Directive has not only consequences on the countries, but also on the citizens, as they can take advantage of it. The only persons that can not invoke it are the Governments of the failing countries. As the BSA is no country, they can make use of the Directive before a judge.

      You can debate over it as long as you want, just check a manual on EU law, and you'll see :)

    6. Re:There's no point to this article... by 00_NOP · · Score: 2

      It's not strictly true that the law can be applied immediately the directive is passed - that is what the deadline is for. But yes, anyone could now take their government to the ECJ Court of the First Instance and complain about non-compliance.

    7. Re:There's no point to this article... by Pofy · · Score: 1

      If I am not mistaken, you can take a country to the "EU court". You can't take a civil case there, right?

      People in individual countries still "only" has to follow theor own laws, but one can take the country to the court for not having the rigth laws so to speak. Perhaps anyone can elighten us on this.

    8. Re:There's no point to this article... by doctomoe · · Score: 2, Informative

      You can indeed only take countries to the EU Court and in rare cases companies.

      However that's not the root of the problem. Individuals, as well as most companies will of course use national Courts first. As the Directive has passed its deadline, EU law grants it a direct effect for EU citizens, thus they can invoke it in front of the local judge. This one could of course refuse to to apply it, saying it is not local law, but the risk is low, as he's aware that his decision would be reversed, either by the local Appelate Court, the local High Court or in the worst case by the EU Court.

      So the Directive pretty much will produce its effects in all of the EU countries from now on, as nowadays local judges tend not to challenge EU Courts (in any case they will lose when not applying a Directive...)

      Next to that, I actually took the pain to read the Directive and in my opinion, it doesn't bring anything new in respect to most local laws (such as French law for instance), which may also explain why that much countries didn't bother to formally implement it yet. All the panic issued here is mostly hype, we're not in front of a Dark Age of Digital Copyright, the Directive just regroups the existing laws in the majority of the countries in one formal and unified document.

      This Directive won't affect the issue of an actual lawsuit in 99% of the cases...

    9. Re:There's no point to this article... by Lumpy · · Score: 2

      So in effect the wonderful EU system they have now is in all essence the same as the United states... The fed's make a law and the states HAVE to follow them...

      so what do we call the european nations now? The unites States of Europe?

      If any of the countries in that group has any balls, they would reject the EU and recede from the group right now.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    10. Re:There's no point to this article... by doctomoe · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Well, i guess it's too late to back off now for the countries. As for the reference to the federal system, the EU, though a unique system, will tend more and more to a federal type system in future. Especially as they are currently working on a EU Constitution, which will be the basement to a European Federation.

    11. Re:There's no point to this article... by Idarubicin · · Score: 2
      So in effect the wonderful EU system they have now is in all essence the same as the United states... The fed's make a law and the states HAVE to follow them...

      so what do we call the european nations now? The unites States of Europe?

      How about the "European Union"? I coulda' sworn that EU acronym thingy meant something...

      If any of the countries in that group has any balls, they would reject the EU and recede from the group right now.

      First, the word you're looking for is secede. Second, these countries voluntarily joined the EU, not that long ago. They have significantly more say in the actions of the EU as a whole than individual states do in the US. Finally, a question: does Michigan separate from the United States (or threaten to) every time the federal government does something stupid? Getting along with other nations sometimes requires patience and compromise--notions with which leaders of all nations should familiarize themselves.

      --
      ~Idarubicin
    12. Re:There's no point to this article... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good points, but then again; the EU commission and parliament is even less democratically elected and even more corrupt than their US counterparts..
      Most of the countries populations' aren't really asked about anything EU-related, other than elections some places which are held sometimes twice (to force people to vote yes after they reject it the first time :)

    13. Re:There's no point to this article... by Thomas+the+Rhymer · · Score: 1

      Well you may have studied EU law for 2 years but it looks like you have only studied EU politics for 2 minutes. The EU is not even close to being a supranational federal entity and political power rests very much with the national governments who decide if when and how EU Directives will be implemented. National courts follow national law, not Brussels. Many EU nations have a long list of un-implemented directives of which the leader is France. Indeed when EU directives and other nonsense do not suit a sovereign state it just tells the EU to go and get stuffed - again three recent examples come from France. (1) France flatly refused to obey EU directives and court decisions relating to beef imports (2) France has refused to allow the ECB (European Central Bank) to set its budget and (3) France and Spain have announced and enforced (with warships) a ban on single hulled oil tankes > 15yrs old within 200nm of their coast. So dear US Slashdotters remember that Europe is in reality the feisty disunited continent that it always was, regardless of the desires of would be empire builders. Brussels is not the capital of Europe, it is just a retirement home for failed bureaucrats and politicians and of course a life support system for Europe's farmers who take half the budget.

  19. Re:Spellcheck!-nah! by tomhudson · · Score: 2
    1. DCMA == Defence Contract Management Agency
    2. DMCA == Digital Millenium Copyright Act
    Spellcheckers don't know much about acronyms, esp. since they're both valid, and they're both Big Brother - related :-)
  20. Late == canceled? by Soft · · Score: 5, Interesting
    It seems that only two member nations had adopted the local law and therfore the Euro wide law will not be adopted.

    Don't rejoice too fast; I fail to understand how the article implies that most member countries being late means that the directive will not be implemented...

    1. Re:Late == canceled? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is a deadline, that is how.

    2. Re:Late == canceled? by doctomoe · · Score: 2, Informative
      The deadline doesn't matter, the only thing it changes is that the failing countries will have to pay a fine (If the EU Commission claims so). It doesn't change anything to the obligatory effect of the EU Directive.

      Finally, let's notice that around 80% of EU Directives are implemented late, so there's not even a particular message connected to the countries being late to do it...

  21. Only two nations... by Fyz · · Score: 5, Interesting

    ... Unfurtunately, I happen to live in Denmark, one of the two. We have a small, private organization going by the name of Anti Pirate Group, who get issued warrants from local judges, and afterwards basically bust into people's homes, rummaging through their computers and CD collection in search of pirate material.

    There have been cases where they have denied the owner the right to an attorney, on the grounds that "it would take too long", and other similarly unfair treatment of suspected pirates.

    Another case was when they confiscated a computer from a 13-year old attending a LAN party, and then have him, to his great embarrasment, hauled downtown for questioning without attendence of his legal guardian.

    A recent competition of their making was hacked, and the email addresses of the participants were signed up on just about every spamlist in existance.

    Can't say I feel much sympathy...

    1. Re:Only two nations... by zbuffered · · Score: 2

      Wow, reading that, I feel violent urges towards those folks. They went to a LAN party??? You show up at a LAN party where I come from and try to confiscate someone's stuff, you've got 50-300 angry, angry people breathing down your neck.

      --
      Synergy is your friend
    2. Re:Only two nations... by sploxx · · Score: 1

      Hmm, sounds interesting! May be you can give pointers to news articles covering these things? Thank you in advance.

    3. Re:Only two nations... by Fyz · · Score: 1

      Correction, you've got 50-300 angry, angry, frustrated, confused teenage geeks sitting at their computers, not knowing whether this is lawful or whether they should do anything. Maybe just being scared shitless that they too could be subjected to fines in the order of $$$$$.$$.
      And yes, the group makes my blood curl, almost as much as Bush.

    4. Re:Only two nations... by jlanthripp · · Score: 2, Funny
      We have a small, private organization going by the name of Anti Pirate Group, who get issued warrants from local judges, and afterwards basically bust into people's homes, rummaging through their computers and CD collection in search of pirate material.

      Anyone intending to burst into my home suddenly and without warning, apart from duly sworn-in law enforcement officers bearing a valid search warrant and announcing themselves as such, would be well-advised to have his will up to date. This home is protected by Smith & Wesson, among others.

      --
      "Alcohol, Tobacco, & Firearms" should be a convenience store, not a government agency.
    5. Re:Only two nations... by Kragg · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Twat.

      --
      If you can't see this, click here to enable sigs.
    6. Re:Only two nations... by Fyz · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately, most of the material available is in danish. However, I found something about it on wired, cdfreaks and infoanarchy. The most important link in danish is here. Siffan, the guy I mentioned in the parent, is working on an english translation of the bust, which happened in september. Currently, AntiPiratGruppen's methods of obtaining evidence are under investigation by the government.

    7. Re:Only two nations... by Fyz · · Score: 1

      As much as I hate being at the risk of this scenario, I'm quite happy with the extremely restrictive weapon laws in Denmark, which cause shooting incidents to be so rare, that when they happen it's always in the major national newspapers the next day. Even for a small nation(5 million), thats pretty good security. No, the danish way of protecting your privacy has always been to just bitch really loud, like me. Sometimes it works in small countries.

    8. Re:Only two nations... by jez9999 · · Score: 1

      Bush usually makes things get long and hard...

    9. Re:Only two nations... by Fyz · · Score: 1

      Yeah, like my telescoping totensläger baton...

    10. Re:Only two nations... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not really a question of crime - as i see it it'a question of funsamental rights - The government shoultn't decide how (or if) you can defend yourself. Redakula (who's also a dane)

    11. Re:Only two nations... by Iamthefallen · · Score: 2, Funny

      The Swedish Anti Pirat Byrån had a recorded interview on their site which was from a radio show about how piracy hurts the poor poor business owners, why piracy is bad, copyright laws etc etc.

      The twist? They didn't bother to ask the radio station for permission before they put it up there, then tried to make it a case of fair use when the radio station called them on it...

      --
      Wax-Museum Fire Results In Hundreds Of New Danny DeVito Statues
    12. Re:Only two nations... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      not suprising from Denmark... It explains why we have a HUGE amount of your countrymen and countrywomen who live here in the states fleeing the insanity and stupidity that is your countrie's lifestyle and government...

      Go to denmark, yeah, you can smoke all the pot you want, but remember that the state owns you.

    13. Re:Only two nations... by Fyz · · Score: 1

      An interesting comment from a nation where you can become leader of the "free" world without even getting more votes than your opponent.

    14. Re:Only two nations... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That should be Antipiratbyrån.

    15. Re:Only two nations... by Iamthefallen · · Score: 1

      Ack, alldeles rätt, tackar.

      --
      Wax-Museum Fire Results In Hundreds Of New Danny DeVito Statues
    16. Re:Only two nations... by Danta · · Score: 1

      BTW, does this have any connection to the new law which makes it illegal to import movies into Denmark for commmercial resale?

    17. Re:Only two nations... by Fyz · · Score: 1

      No. AntiPiratGruppen are a privately funded organization founded by the entertainment industry. The law of imported movies is the government. I'm not really familiar with that, except what i've seen in the news.

    18. Re:Only two nations... by zbuffered · · Score: 2

      Don't correct me! I qualified that with "where I come from" because it's true. Maybe you grew up with no courage to stick up for your beliefs when there's something that's not right, but "where I come from", you don't just barge into a private convention and start harassing people like that. Yeah, that's right, these people feel sympathy. For someone being arrested by the BSA like that. And they would not sit idly by.

      --
      Synergy is your friend
    19. Re:Only two nations... by Fyz · · Score: 1

      Yeah, sorry, I missed the "where i come from" part. But these people weren't just barging in and harrasing people. They had an inside agent, and knew exactly who they were going after, and where he sat. They had a computer expert, a lawyer and 2 police officers with them. (This is all 2nd hand, I wasn't there).

      It is my general observation and experience that one thing is saying to yourself what you would be doing in a given situation, another is having to think and act on your feet when this situation actually happens. And though this situation may not seem like the hellish scenario of, for example, combat, imagine being a teenager, deeply immersed in your CS game, when these guys suddenly come barging in. I'm being honest here, 7 or 8 years ago, I certainly wouldn't have had the guts to stand up for my beliefs.

      BTW, the kid got off the hook, and the parents are now suing APG for legal fees(one cannot sue for mental anguish in Denmark, which I see as basically a Good Thing).

    20. Re:Only two nations... by zbuffered · · Score: 2

      Okay, you have a good point about one person not having the guts to stand up for his beliefs, but it only takes one person to say, "Wait a minute, those guys are arresting that kid! We should be concerned or upset about this!" to give a large group of people a little push towards attempting to over-rule a small group. I'm just saying that I can see how it might happen, but I understand how it may seem unlikely, seeing as to how you know how it went down in this particular case, whereas I can only imagine.

      --
      Synergy is your friend
  22. But the bad thing is by rolfwind · · Score: 2, Informative

    the BSA will keep trying and trying...... that's what particularly bad about this situation.... it will keep on going and going and going - they just lost one round.

    The EU recently welcomed in a bunch of nations from Eastern Europe, around 10, like Poland. Those countries don't make a lot of money on Software Sales yet, nor on giant media type stuff. What's the incentive to pass a law for the politicians whene it doesn't do anything for their nation. They wolud have to see a benefit (personal or national) or its going to be a backburner issue for them.

  23. DRM will always be cracked by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Wether its legal or not. Cracks are everywhere for this stuff, this will just hurt fair rights!

    Luckily the UK goverment has been keeping up with computers. As long as 0s and 1's can be extracted, drm will never suceed (and good thing too).

    If companies really want to stop piracy, they have to make it easier to get it legitmatley (in music, provide HIGH quality media, which can be downloaded from FAST servers, which can be burned to disc for a LOW price (£1 for a good song would be resonable) AND IS INTEROPERABLE, so anyone can use it, mobile phones, linux, set top boxes et al. That way, people will stop using spyware ridden slow and dangerous software to get low quality, potentally virus ridden files.

  24. DCMA? by unformed · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    OH MY GOD? I didn't even know that the the Dark Chronicled Messiah of AnitKristos had returned! Thanks for being on top of things Slashdot!

  25. BLASPHEMY! by unformed · · Score: 4, Funny

    Thou shalt not speaketh the word "spellcheck" in Commander Taco's Realm.

    Repent, fellkow mortal, REPENT!

    1. Re:BLASPHEMY! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know who let a mortal in here, but I feel unclean now. Must go take an ambrosia bath...

    2. Re:BLASPHEMY! by jez9999 · · Score: 2

      It's irrelevant. A spellchecker wouldn't fix an acronym anyway.

  26. Yay! by Karamchand · · Score: 2

    Go Europe, go! I knew you weren't as stupid as the american goverment! :)

    1. Re:Yay! by LarsG · · Score: 2

      Sadly, the demise of the EuroDMCA (Directive 2001/29/EC) is not at hand.

      The only thing is that the directive was supposed to be implemented in the law of all EU countries before Dec 22. It has not been stopped, it has only been delayed.

      So, stop cheering and start writing letters to the press and government.

      --
      If J.K.R wrote Windows: Puteulanus fenestra mortalis!
  27. RTFA by KilljoyAZ · · Score: 2

    From the article:

    Mingorance at the BSA said it may be months before any EU-wide law goes into effect. "I'm hopeful that before the summer it will be adopted, or at least before the end of next year, but then that will be very late."

    --
    This .sig is currently on hiatus for retooling.
    1. Re:RTFA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      yeah, he hopes, may he dreams

      See this

      cheers

  28. What I don't get... by BorgDrone · · Score: 5, Insightful

    From the article:

    With hopes dashed of having a strong copyright law in place for the start of 2003, media and software companies complain that they are largely unprotected from digital piracy

    I don't get this, making copies of copyrighted content was already illegal, why would they need extra laws for digital content ? Why would a law that forbids decrypting data protect them any more than they are now ? It's not like the pirates are suddenly going to care about the fact that what they doing is illegal.

    1. Re:What I don't get... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Well, now they'll have to settle for the boring old way of: waiting until infringement occurs, finding the infringer, filing papers in court, you know, the same old 20th-century, pre-9/11 routine.

      With these new laws they can bypass all that fluff and get right the ISP takedown and the FBI black-bag operations. And they can arrest people for pre-crimes (making tools instead of actually infringing). Maybe someday they can just get court orders to monitor anyone over the age of 8 who shows interest in computers (interest in computers == interest in breaking the law, don't you know?).

      But for now, they'll just have to learn that in Europe, you bribe politicians with hookers, not money. They'll be back soon, harlots in hand, and soon they can sleep safely in their beds.

    2. Re:What I don't get... by apweiler · · Score: 1

      I think preventing piracy isn't the only important part (though perhaps for the BSA it is) - they also want more (total?) control, i.e. using DRM and all to make you pay per use of something, keep you from moving it onto other players, and especially enforcing region controls and such.

      Another thing is: This will help stop casual piracy. Professional pirates make bit-copies of CSS'ed DVDs (or copy-protected CDs), but private users don't always have the possibility. A lot of private copying is not actually piracy - but they'd like to stop it anyway. And there simply is a *lot* of casual piracy, copying CDs or software for a friend. The old argument of 'I wouldn't have bought it anyway' comes in here - not in the moral sense 'it's still theft!!!' but because it raises the question whether stopping this copying would increase sales. I'm not so sure.

  29. BSA by mslinux · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Was Microsoft the founder of the BSA? It seems kinda odd to me that only a few dozen companies are a part of the BSA and that most of those companies, with the exception of Apple and IBM, have close ties to MS.

    Does anyone know who exactly is behind the BSA?

    Thanks!

    1. Re:BSA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I remember them from 15 or so years ago. They were running an advertizing campaign in Computer & Video Games magazine against software piracy, promising all sorts of legal trouble for kids stupid enough to get illegally copied software. The text ran something like "This disk [legal] can give you hours of fun. This disk [illegal] can get you six months in prison."

      In other words, they have been around for a fairly long time. However, there have been reports of them having a rather strong Microsoft-bias. That includes forcing companies to switch entirely to Microsoft products (and therefore away from Novell) to escape fines.

      So in answer to your question: their origin may have been non-Microsoft, but nowadays they are just another Microsoft tool.

    2. Re:BSA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Incorrect. Microsoft sold the stock for a lovely profit a long time ago.

    3. Re:BSA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The BSA is a company. What they amount to are legalised extortionists. They don't give a shit about your software being copied unless you pay them and become a "member". Besides this, they wouldn't exist if people didn't pirate software so in a way they're reducing their revenue stream every time they bust someone. I hope Paladium/DRM puts them out of business - they deserve it.

    4. Re:BSA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      It seems kinda odd to me that only a few dozen companies are a part of the BSA and that most of those companies, with the exception of Apple and IBM, have close ties to MS.

      Apple kisses ass to keep MS Office on Mac, and even IBM bowed to MS with their commercial division kowtowing when MS threatened to revoke their license for Windows.

    5. Re:BSA by Tenebrious1 · · Score: 2

      It seems kinda odd to me that only a few dozen companies are a part of the BSA

      That's easy enough. What software is most frequently pirated? Windows. Office. Visual Studio. Photoshop. Illustrator. AutoCAD. ColdFusion. The big apps that cost lots of money, the companies are all members of the BSA. Then things like NAV and McAfee Antivirus, Quicken, stuff people hand to friends without a second thought.

      What I find interesting is that you don't find PC game makers on the list of members. I wonder why?

      --
      -- If god wanted me to have a sig, he'd have given me a sense of humor.
    6. Re:BSA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      http://www.bsa.org/usa/about/members/
      BSA Members:
      World Wide Members:
      Adobe Systems
      Apple
      Autodesk
      Bentley Systems
      Borland
      CNC Software/Mastercam
      Macromedia
      Microsoft
      Network Associates
      Symantec
      Unigraphics Solutions/EDS

      Policy Council Members:
      Dell
      Entrust
      HP
      IBM
      Intel
      Intuit
      N ovell
      PeopleSoft
      SeeBeyond Technology
      Sybase

    7. Re:BSA by nullard · · Score: 1

      What I find interesting is that you don't find PC game makers on the list of members. I wonder why?

      Maybe they're not members of the Business Software Alliance because they don't sell business software?

      --


      t'nera semordnilap
  30. Re:Well.. it's not theft! by AYeomans · · Score: 2, Insightful
    See the article by Fast's Paul Brennan on Computer Weekly's article "Make copyright law user-friendly" (Search for "copyright law" in quotes, might require registration.)


    Quoting from the article: "However when an employee takes source code, or a company removes protection from a demo version of software and sells it as its own product, it certainly feels like theft, but technically it is not stealing. The case of Oxford v Morris held that software was not property and copying it was not stealing for the purpose of the Theft Act. However it is copyright infringement."


    You may well not agree with other points in this article, such as the need to criminalise circumvention, as software publishers are too poor to bring their own court case.


    But let's not further devalue the language, by calling copyright infringement by incorrect emotive words such as theft and piracy.

    --
    Andrew Yeomans
  31. no protection by Spellbinder · · Score: 0

    poor bsa

    --


    stop supporting microsoft with pirating their software!!!!!
  32. childish by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    you know I think sometimes, little kids need to get their hands slapped for doing something wrong. Stealing is wrong. Doesnt matter what it is. Ouch, my hand.

  33. The BSA may complain all they want. . . by kfg · · Score: 2

    that they have no protection. The fact of the matter is their *right* to protection is defined by *law.* In fact, the very right to have anything to protect at *all* is so defined.

    Without such definitions they have * no rights.*

    IP is a purely manmade construct. Different nations and cultures have different ideas on the extent to which they will assert and defend such "rights."

    If you wish to do business internationally, get used to it.

    You might well even have to get used to the idea that certain cultures and legal systems do not accept the so called "right" to IP.

    It's incredibly arrogant to take your business model formed to comply with and take advantage of one nation's set of laws and demand that other nations mold their laws to comply with your business model.

    If you find this arrangement unacceptable why not get into a business where you *make stuff?* It works for others.

    KFG

    1. Re:The BSA may complain all they want. . . by NDPTAL85 · · Score: 2

      This only a minor setback for American Hegmony. Afterall, no Empire is perfect.

      --
      Mac OS X and Windows XP working side by side to fight back the night.
  34. I have a statement I'd like to make to the BSA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    bwahahahahhahahhahahahahahhahahhahah!!!

  35. I bet these people sing... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    o/^* Y-C-M-A! ... o/^

    *Thank you, Slashdot, for filtering out every single entity and unicode character known to man. Things such as &#9835; &copy; &reg; &trade; &nbsp; and &dagger; are all obviously a major threat to humanity, and Greek characters such as &pi; &Omega; and &Delta; are of absolutely no use on a technical discussion site, so of course a teeny-tiny whitelist with no apparent way for users to submit entities for approval is the best way to go about things.</sarcasm>

  36. The BSA claims they have no protection... by Cheeze · · Score: 2

    ...to maintain their monopoly. What did you expect them to say, "OK, we give up, you can copy anything you want and we don't care?" Any business man will tell you they are only in business to make money. Any business man that tells you different is probably selling something.

    --
    Why read the article when I can just make up a snap judgement?
  37. No reason to celebrate... by Kjella · · Score: 5, Informative

    The laws are late, but that doesn't mean that the remaining EU countries won't adopt them. Particularly with all the controversy around them, and the large consequences, things take longer than the very optimistic deadline. In particular, some of the things it implements is:

    * Your right is now tied to media. It's no longer legal to make mp3s of your cds, for one. Each country can make exceptions, but that's the directive.

    * Illegal to import media from other zones (for companies). Blatant undermining of free trade and competition in my opinion. Also illegal to sell zonefree players or any other kind of "circumvention device".

    It's the backdoor way of extortion. You can purchase something without a licence, but you can not use it unless you have a licenced player, and by extension, those licence terms apply to YOU.

    Let me put this in a way USians can understand:

    You buy a car in the US. It runs fine on the petrol around you, so no probs. Then you want to take it to europe, but you can't. Not for any technical reason, but because it can only use licenced gas, and that gas is only licenced to the US. Note that you never signed a licence agreeing to the fact that the car is only good in the US, but you've been had.

    It's also illegal to make your car work with any other gas. And if you ask the car manufacturer, he'll suggest that you either sell your US car and accessories and buy a Euro car (and likewise sell your Euro car and buy the US one back when you get home), or if you like it so much, buy one of each, even if they in function are completely identical.

    Screw them. If they want to make it region-crippled, they're asking for it. I don't mind if they copyprotect it with CSS2 or whatever. But if I'm banned from buying DVDs because I'm in the wrong zone, then they are just pissing me off. Somehow businesses should think a little about the customers they *do* have, and not only about the pirates (arr!) they *don't* have as customers, and probably won't have in the future anyway.

    Kjella

    --
    Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    1. Re:No reason to celebrate... by kevin+lyda · · Score: 2

      i agree with your hypothetical example all the way up to the part where they say you should sell your us version. as far as i can see, they want to try to stop people from selling old cd's, dvd's and other such things.

      except for the insane insurance here in ireland, i nearly did bring my car over when i emigrated. and thank god i did it before i got into dvd's. i would have been majorly pissed if my entire collection would need to be repurchased (even if i didn't lose money; just the hassle of buying it all again). obviously i have a region free player so it wouldn't really have been an issue, but how much longer will region free players exist?

      --
      US Citizen living abroad? Register to vote!
    2. Re:No reason to celebrate... by fldvm · · Score: 1
      Let me put this in a way USians can understand:

      You buy a car in the US. It runs fine on the petrol...

      As an American I have two questions:

      1. What is an USian?

      2. What is Petrol?

    3. Re:No reason to celebrate... by jez9999 · · Score: 1

      Your question strongly suggests that you know the answer to both of those questions :-)

      But seriously, I think that Americans understand perfectly well how the DMCA works. THEIR POLITICIANS INVENTED THE DAMN THING! Why oh why can't you people find a way to control your fucking greed?

    4. Re:No reason to celebrate... by Elledan · · Score: 1

      While reading the (current and past) restrictions placed on buying/playing audio, movies, etc., does anyone realize that doing the aforementioned things the _illegal_ way is so much easier?

      If I get audio, movies, etc. from P2P, IRC, and so on, I can use it whatever way I want to use it, and I can still buy the CD/DVD/etc. in the shop.

      If only the CDs weren't crippled with 'copy-protection', the DVDs encrypted and restricted to certain regios, not to mention the outrageous prices which are being asked for CDs in particular.

      We, the customers, will eventually choose the _easiest_ way, which might not necessarily be the _legal_ way. And there's no way to stop this process as long as there's still a shred of freedom left.

      --
      Site & blog: http://www.mayaposch.com
    5. Re:No reason to celebrate... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why oh why can't you people find a way to control your fucking greed?

      Because we hate you.

    6. Re:No reason to celebrate... by poot_rootbeer · · Score: 2

      I'm having trouble relating to your analogy. Not that many people move from North America to Europe or vice versa during their lifetimes, and of those that do I'd imagine only a tiny minority actually bring along their autos.

      Also, each country has its own rules about what makes a motor vehicle road-worthy, so even without artificial region locking it's possible that a car that is legal to drive in European countries would not be legal in the US, or vice versa. You don't have to sign a license agreeing that the car is only guaranteed to be street legal in the country you're in -- it's implicit in the law.

      (BTWIANAL)

    7. Re:No reason to celebrate... by moncyb · · Score: 2

      I don't mind if they copyprotect it with CSS2 or whatever. But if I'm banned from buying DVDs because I'm in the wrong zone, then they are just pissing me off.

      CSS is encryption, not copy protection. Encyryption doesn't stop anything from being copied. The entire point of CSS is for region encoding, forcing you to watch commercials, and making sure the DVD will only work on approved players.

    8. Re:No reason to celebrate... by Dyolf+Knip · · Score: 2
      I think the analogy is an extremely good one. Assume that the car is legal to drive on both sides of the pond. This is not unreasonable, since the manufacturer would probably not close out his ability to sell in these other markets unless it really wasn't worth the cost. So what we have here is the exact same car being driven on both continents, and yet it is not immediately possible (and therefore, under the DMCA, illegal) to take a vehicle from one to the other and drive it around.

      Remember also that 'road-driving license agreements' only apply when you are driving on a public road. The DMV can't do squat if all you do is tool around on your own property. But the inability to fill the tank from the local gas station negates even that.

      --
      Dyolf Knip
  38. New Measure... by rnturn · · Score: 4, Funny
    ``The BSA is complaining they have no protections.''

    Could this be a new measure of how well something is aligned with the public's best interests? If the BSA doesn't like it, it's gotta be good?

    Works for me!

    --
    CUR ALLOC 20195.....5804M
  39. 3 states, not 2... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Italy had law provisions for it since August 2000.

  40. I don't know how to feel... by oZZoZZ · · Score: 1

    Pirating software is, and should be illegal. If someone writes a very good office suite, then they have the right to charge money for it. At the same time, $900CDN for a program that I use over notepad essentially for spell check isn't worth it. Downloading the newest CD that cost millions on production, advertising and money to the artist is wrong. However the record companies are making more than artists do on cds. And have you seen what CDs cost in europe? they're only $15CDN, and nearly 4x that in europe. If I buy a movie, I should be able to watch it wherever I want, and lend it to whoever I want, but I don't think I should be allowed to copy it and give it to all my friends. At the same time, if I buy a movie in Japan, I want it to work here. I think if company X spends millions of dollars to develop a new compression format, they should be allowed to charge royalties for it, but at the same time, I believe that the internet should be built on open royalty free standards... I am confused

  41. Awww, what a shame by bratgrrl · · Score: 1

    I weep for the BSA. This is a tragedy. A sad, sad, sad, sad, sad, sad day for the freedom-loving peoples of the BSA.

    --

    ---

    SCO is weenies
    Gator is Spyware
    Microsoft is thugs

  42. Keep in mind. by PHAEDRU5 · · Score: 2

    The Eurocrats in Brussels never give up. If at first you don't succeed, scare, scare, scare.

    I mean, look at Ireland and the Nice Treaty. Rejected first time round, the Government then sponsored a scare campaign in its favor and had a revote. You may bet your bottom dollar that now they've approved the Nice Treaty, the ignorant masses will never be asked another opinion.

    This law will eventually be the law of Europe.

    --
    668: Neighbour of the Beast
  43. Hurray, they rejected the DCMA! by Alethes · · Score: 2

    The Europeans are rejecting the United States' Defense Contract Management Agency!

    Errrr....wait a sec.

  44. Ha ha. by liposuction · · Score: 0

    Funniest post on this story yet.

    Stupid ingnorant Mingorance.

    --
    "Thoughts are more powerful than any weapon, and I don't even let my people own guns." --Joseph Stalin
  45. P -A-R-T-Y :-) by Goldenpi · · Score: 1

    Britain nearly did impliment it. As far as I know the UK implimentation is still tied up in a lot of red tape involveing the patent office. I suspect a UK-DMCA will pass with or without the EUCD. Still, this is very good news. Not surprised the BSA complained :-)

  46. Denmark by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Apparently, one of the countries that already implemented the Euro DMCA directive is Denmark, you know, the country which is about to switch schools to Linux according to this headline. Strange policy!

    1. Re:Denmark by laurensv · · Score: 1

      All countries in the EU are oliged to pass this law because itss a directive (http://www.europa.eu.int/eur-lex/en/about/pap/pro cess_and_players2.html), the deadline just means that the European Commision may now start a case against those countries who didn't already. But because it's a directive each country can chose for themselves who to put this into their national law and also if/what specifications, loopholes,... they put in it.

    2. Re:Denmark by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Read this

  47. It's not an acronym, it's an abbreviation by oldmacdonald · · Score: 2, Informative

    An abbreviation is a shortened form of a word (replacing the letters IGITAL with a "." in the D of D.M.C.A for example). An acronym is when an abbreviation itself works as a word, liked RADAR.

    1. Re:It's not an acronym, it's an abbreviation by tomhudson · · Score: 3, Informative
      It's an acronym. Acronyms don't have to spell words. Your example is an example: before the phrase "RAdio Detection And Rannging" was shortened, there was no such thing as RADAR. Same with SCUBA (Self-Contained Underwater Breathing Apparatus), etc. Until they were shortened into acronyms, there was no such word.

      You, sir, don't know what you're talking about.

    2. Re:It's not an acronym, it's an abbreviation by oldmacdonald · · Score: 1
      My quick check of the alt.usage.english FAQ (now that's an acronym!) reveals the following, which agrees seems to agree with me in spirit, but then more or less gives up:
      Strictly, an acronym is a string of initial letters pronounceable as a word, such as "NATO". Abbreviations like "NBC" have been variously designated "alphabetisms" and "initialisms", although some people do call them acronyms. WDEU says, "Dictionaries, however, do not make this distinction [between acronyms and initialisms] because writers in general do not"; but two or the best known books on acronyms are titled _Acronyms, Initialisms and Abbreviations Dictionary_ (19th ed., Gale 1993) and _Concise Dictionary of Acronyms and Initialisms_ (Facts on File, 1988).
      Strangely, the Acronym Database, which that same FAQ references, is much more insistent that I'm wrong:
      No, there is nothing about acronyms which means that, it's a mistaken idea perpetuated by some American dictionaries who should know better. FBI is indisputably an acronym but it's pronounced Eff-Bee-Eye.
      I guess I'm willing to consider DMCA an acronym if one accepts that it's a _word_ pronounced "dee em see ay," which, while I may be forced to accept, I find unappealing. I wonder if William Safire has a column on the matter.
    3. Re:It's not an acronym, it's an abbreviation by tomhudson · · Score: 2
      Welcome to the club. NOBODY finds the DMCA appealing :-)

      How about s/appealing/repelling/; ?

    4. Re:It's not an acronym, it's an abbreviation by ThaReetLad · · Score: 2

      I Wish...

      s/appealing/repealing/;?

      --
      You can't win Darth. If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine
  48. Re:What's DMCA? by titaniam · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Shame on those who replied rudely to this person! If this poster is for real, you might have just alienated him/her not only from you, but from your cause as well. All of us learn of these things for the first time, so relax and be informative instead of just angry.

  49. Silly Acronyms.... by artsygeek · · Score: 1

    Of course...as I always say, BSA (Business Software Alliance) thinks they're the BSA (Boy Scouts of America), and that's 100% pure BS.

  50. No protections? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What about the good ol' overreaching EULA? There's your protection, BSA whiners.

  51. Re:look ma, no hands! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Congratulations, first poster, YOU DID IT!

    EuroDMCA, YOU FAIL IT!

  52. What about the YMCA? by tommck · · Score: 2

    I heard that they were having some problems too... ;-)

    --
    ---- It puts the lotion on its skin or else it gets the hose again. It does this whenever it's told.
  53. This guy has the musical ability of a cabbage. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Do people not know how to count syllables anymore? The song goes:

    1 2, 3 4 5 6 7 8
    1 2 3 4, 5 6 7 8 9 10
    1 2 3 4, 5 6 7 8 9 10
    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 (9?)

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7-8-9-10
    1 2 3 4 5 6 7-8-9-10-(10)

    1 2 3 4 5 6
    1 2 3 4 5 6
    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

    But this guy has:

    1 2, 3 4 5 6 7 8
    1 2 3 4, 5 6 7 8
    1 2 3 4, 5 6 7 8-9-10-11
    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

    1 2, 3 4 5 6 7-8-9
    1 2 3 4, 5 6-7 8 9-10-11
    1 2 3 4, 5 6 7 8 9
    1 2-3-4 5-6 7 8 9

    1 2 3 4-5 6-7 8 9-10-11-12
    1 2 3 4-5 6-7 8 9-10-11-12

    1 2 3 4-5-6 7 8
    1 2 3 4 5-6 7 8 9

  54. High price... by Vrallis · · Score: 3, Funny

    European lawmakers must have an insanely high price if MPAA/RIAA haven't paid them off already. Ours were bought and sold for pennies.

    Today's special, three Senators for only $1.00! Purchase 10 packs and you are entitled to your choice of 10% off any Supreme Court Justice of your choice or the Vice Pacemaker...erm...President!

    1. Re:High price... by 91degrees · · Score: 1

      Just different electoral rules.

      As far as I understand it, in the US, there is no limit on the amount of money a party can spend on campaigning and advertising. The effect is that major parties need vast corporate donations to prevent themselves from being drowned out by the opposition.

      European countries tend to feel giving the richest party the loudest voice leads to an unfair election, and typically impose strict limits on how much they can spend on their campaign, reducing the value of large corporate donations.

      There are also strict rules about accepting private donations, so the media cartels can't very easily bribe individual MPs. Besides, in many countries, party politics rule, and the representatives have to tow the party line.

  55. BSA is upset because... by BoomerSooner · · Score: 2

    All their kiddie porn is being illegally copied on the internet.

    Remember they don't want gay's but petifiles are AOK!

    Assholes.

    1. Re:BSA is upset because... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Funny, I always thought it was about the rights to a private organization to allow who they want in said organization. I'm also fairly certain that anyone on any sex offender list as well as gays are not allowed to be leaders, though I'm under the impression gays can still be Scouts.

    2. Re:BSA is upset because... by bucky0 · · Score: 1

      No, I think that the BSA believes petafiles(sp?) aren't AOK...

      --

      -Bucky
  56. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 0

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  57. How exactly is the BSA involved?!? by phulshof · · Score: 1

    As far as I remember this EU directive does not apply to software. In fact: software has had a non-circumvention clause in Dutch law for quite some time already.

  58. Sigh... EU Directive != DMCA by memes · · Score: 2, Informative

    PLEASE go read the Directive. It's short, as these things go, certainly much snappier than US legislation is - though the URL I have is long:

    http://europa.eu.int/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi !celexapi!prod!CELEXnumdoc&lg=EN&numdoc=32001L0029 &model=guichett

    Among other differences from the DMCA, it establishes a *right* to exercise the equivalent of "fair-use". My reading of the draft UK regulations implementing this Directive suggests, for example, that if I want to make a Braille transcript of Disney's next opus and it's encrypted, I can apply to the Home Secretary (=~ Minister for the Interior) for appropriate cracking tools to get the job done.

    And my reading of the Directive itself is that once an encrypted work enters the public domain, it must open itself up. Cue "foom" sound of .PDFs blatting out plain text automatically 70 years after my death and mailing the Gutenberg Project to say 'hi'...

    And, as others have pointed out, the fact that EU member states are late implementing the Directive doesn't mean it falls. It's not a US Constitutional Amendment, guys. Other legal systems are available, out here.

    F'rexample, only five or six of 15 EU member states have implemented another Directive that says freelances can claim interest (at 7% over base) on invoices paid late by our clients. But even Greece will get round to it eventually - even if it takes a Greek suing her government in den Haag to make it do so.

    1. Re:Sigh... EU Directive != DMCA by phulshof · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Can you please point out the part where it establishes a 'right' to exercise the equivalent of 'fair-use'?

    2. Re:Sigh... EU Directive != DMCA by memes · · Score: 1

      Sheesh. I said "read it". I forgot only to mention that when reading an EU Directive you can skip the "whereas"es and definitions and go straight to Chapter 2 (unless you're a judge in den Haag).

      I simplified it, but here it is:

      Article 6: Obligations as to technical measures

      4. Notwithstanding the legal protection provided for in paragraph 1, in the absence of voluntary measures taken by rightholders, including agreements between rightholders and other parties concerned, Member States shall take appropriate measures to ensure that rightholders make available to the beneficiary of an exception or limitation provided for in national law in accordance with Article 5(2)(a), (2)(c), (2)(d), (2)(e), (3)(a), (3)(b) or (3)(e) the means of benefiting from that exception or limitation, to the extent necessary to benefit from that exception or limitation and where that beneficiary has legal access to the protected work or subject-matter concerned.

      My emphasis. I rest my case.

    3. Re:Sigh... EU Directive != DMCA by phulshof · · Score: 1

      *nod*, I'm very familiar with Article VI part 4. It does not give any indication as to when this should be made available, nor how it should be made available (price, location, proof of ownership required, etc.). If the Dutch implementation is any indication of how this part is viewed I don't have any faith in this part of Article VI.

      On a brighter note though: The explanation of the Dutch proposals sofar show reasonably clearly what this law should not do. In Dutch courts these explanations actually carry a lot of weight. There's still hope. :)

    4. Re:Sigh... EU Directive != DMCA by memes · · Score: 1

      Gosh, your name isn't Hugenholz, is it?

      No... in most EU countries these questions about where, when, how much are going to have to go through the courts; either with prosecutions of those who decrypt for themselves - which I think must eventually fail, but only after schlepping all the way through the national courts to den Haag - or with proactive cases by, for example, the associations of Blind people.

      The "Skylarov" defence would have been much more interesting under EU law...

    5. Re:Sigh... EU Directive != DMCA by phulshof · · Score: 1

      *rofl* no, though I do know the man. :) He didn't seem too happy with the endresult he helped create.

      Your description sums up my problems with part 4 pretty well though: By the time this has been through all the procedures the actual circumvention tool will probably be next to worthless. The entertainment industry will slow this down as much as they can.

    6. Re:Sigh... EU Directive != DMCA by memes · · Score: 1

      No, he's not, is he?

      They'll be able to slow things down if everything goes to plan - e.g. my second alternative, where the X National Institute for the Blind goes to court proactively to get MPEG-4 opened up, by which time of course we'll all be using, er, something else. (In my case, either celluloid, or whatever turns up on broadcast TV, or games on paper, which is why I overlooked the regionalization issue.)

      But if people produce the necessary and entirely legal tools to enable what (for the sake of US readers) we'll call the "fair uses" now, then register all their credit cards and hardware in their cat's name and sit back saying "so, sue me"...

    7. Re:Sigh... EU Directive != DMCA by doctomoe · · Score: 1

      Just as a note: The EU Court is located in Luxembourg, not in Den Haag :P

  59. Is This a Rhetorical Question? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    The digital laws allow the copyright holder to tie up the copyright in technical measures more or less permanently. Can't have any of that nasty having the work going to the public domain. Ever.


    As long as the DMCA is in effect, you'll never be able to get at a copy of DRM protected media, public domain or not. Breaking the DRM for such "Fair Use" purposes will clearly be considered illegal by the courts.


    Phase two would be requiring all digital devices to honor all DRM technology (Fritz is working on that now) and the slow phasing out of players that play unprotected content. End result: Those indie artists who insist on taking a bite of the entertainment pie handily go away because they can't afford the licensing fees for a DRM ID Tag that would allow their content to be played.


    Yes, the DMCA is the biggest intellectual property power-grab in history. How did your congressman vote on it? Whose hands are in his pokects?

    1. Re:Is This a Rhetorical Question? by HiThere · · Score: 2

      "My" senators were in favor of it (the DMCA). My representative was against it. (Not, after I expressed my opinion, that my senators were willing to tell me how they would vote or had voted.) This government is driving me more and more towards anarchism as the superior choice. Not that I think any more favorably of anarchism than I ever have...

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
  60. I don't know what it means this news but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    but in Spain the LSSI has been approved (that is quite more restrictive than the directive of the UE) and Spain doesn't figure in that document


    I don't believe myself anything


    a greeting from Spain

  61. You're correct: it's worse! by phulshof · · Score: 2, Informative

    At least the DMCA stopped at circumventing a 'technological measure' that controls access to a work. The EU directive defines a 'technological measure' as anything that stops you from unauthorized acts. Yes, that's unauthorized acts! That goes quite beyond 'mere' access to a work.

    1. Re:You're correct: it's worse! by memes · · Score: 1

      That's just a difference in legal language - one that's implied by the differences between Common Law (US, UK, IE, CA, AU, IN... you see the pattern?) and Civil Law (elsewhere). Sounds to me as though, despite your email server location, you're assuming US law already applies everywhere?

      And the difference between technological measures that control access to a work and those that limit access to the terms of the licence authorised by the rights-holder would be... what?

      'Course, I object to unreasonable non-authorisation by corporate rights-holders. But, until they bully me out of my rights as an author, I'm a rights-holder. And in most Civil Law jurisdictions we're talking about authorisation by actual, breathing authors here... the Netherlands being the exception for works authored in the course of employment.

    2. Re:You're correct: it's worse! by phulshof · · Score: 1

      A very simple example? MOD chips. The processes in the US around MOD chips were based around copyright infringement, not circumvention. This is because the protective measure in MOD chips does not control access to a copyrighted work, and as such circumventing it is not illegal under the DMCA. Under the EU Directive however this would be illegal as circumvention of a 'non authorized act'.

      And no, I don't believe US law applies outside the US, though not for lack of trying on the US side. There's some very interesting stories on pressure from the US on other countries to adopt this kind of legislation.

    3. Re:You're correct: it's worse! by memes · · Score: 1

      Mmm, you may have a point on regionalization-defeating measures.

      I've long been looking for the logic-bomb which I assume the bright enarques of the French Civil Service inserted in the Directive, specifically to stuff Hollywood. I think we're in the right part of regulation-space here :-)

      And yes, it was impossible to get hold of anyone involved in the Directive for several years' worth of lunchtimes, when they were being entertained courtesy AOL, Disney, et al. Allegedly.

    4. Re:You're correct: it's worse! by phulshof · · Score: 1

      *nod*, the copyright cartel has managed to claim all the right words for political debates like this one. These kinds of debates are not won on arguments, but on rethorics (unfortunately). It's hard to win against 'theft', 'pirates', etc. The entertainment lobby was huge during the creation of this directive. Unfortunately I got involved a tad too late (I learned about the directive on Slashdot), but the national anti-directive lobbies have gotten off pretty well. Both the UK and the Netherlands have seen a flood of comments on the law proposals. Let's hope they'll have some success.

  62. Anti-EUCD fight not finished in France by dolmen.fr · · Score: 2, Informative

    EUCD is the european drective that is the equivalent of DMCA in the European Union.

    The Anti-EUCD fight is not finished in France as the law project has been proposed on December 3rd. It will be voted in february.

    The FSF Europe/France is fighting it. Their aim is to propose arguments to deputees to reject the law. Yes, it is Free Software lobbying.

    The main problem is to inform the mainstream of the danger of this law: the approach is that the law kills the "private copy" autorisation.

    For more information (and more reliable) see http://eucd.info/.
  63. DCMA by z84976 · · Score: 2
    Dastardly Country Music Awards!


    They simply MUST be stopped before it's too late!

  64. Silly acronyms? What acronyms? by FleshWound · · Score: 2
    That's DMCA rather than DCMA -- silly acronyms.
    Neither DMCA, nor DCMA are acronyms. An acronym has to be a pronounceable "word" (such as RADAR or SCUBA). DMCA is nothing more than an abbreviation (like FBI or MTV).
    1. Re:Silly acronyms? What acronyms? by Lxy · · Score: 2

      WFT? MTV and FBI are acronyms!

      --

      There is no reasonable defense against an idiot with an agenda
      :wq
    2. Re:Silly acronyms? What acronyms? by Slur · · Score: 2

      I think an abbreviation is more like this:

      "abbrev."

      An acronym, on the other hand is

      A Concise Reduction Obliquely Naming Your Meaning
      A Cross Reference Of Notes Yielding Messages
      Alphabetical Character Rendition Of a Name Yielding a Meaning
      Alphabetically Coded Reminder of Names You Misremember
      A Contrived Reduction Of Nomenclature Yielding Mnemonics ....

      --
      -- thinkyhead software and media
    3. Re:Silly acronyms? What acronyms? by FleshWound · · Score: 2
      I think an abbreviation is more like this:

      "abbrev."
      While that is an abbreviation, it's not the only example.

      Merriam-Webster's dictionary defines an abbreviation as "a shortened form of a written word or phrase used in place of the whole." FBI and MTV both fall under that definition.

      Merriam-Webster's defines an acronym as "a word formed from the initial letter or letters of each of the successive parts or major parts of a compound term." RADAR and SCUBA fit the definition (RADAR also fits the definition of a palindrome, but that's another topic ;). FBI and MTV do not.
    4. Re:Silly acronyms? What acronyms? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And how do they define "word" a collection of letters? if so then at least FBI alsoo meets the criteria.

      Besides whose to say that FBI isn't a word? RADAR and SCUBA is also just a collection of letters with no prior meaning.

      Maybe you meant to say that RADAR and SCUBA do not have a phonetic per letter as do FBI and MTV. But that is not a criteria in the definitions you gave.

      So, thanks for a moment of distraction from working on the day before christmas troll.

    5. Re:Silly acronyms? What acronyms? by FleshWound · · Score: 2
      But that is not a criteria in the definitions you gave.
      On the contrary, I did say that an acronym must be a pronounceable word. "FBI" is not pronounceable as a word; only as the letters that comprise this supposed "word."
  65. what multi-million dollar bribes? by WinPimp2K · · Score: 1

    US Congresscritters are a whole lot cheaper than that. While the total cost might hit the seven figure range, that is for buying a whole passel of Congresscritters.

    Now, how many Congresscritter equivalents does one have to buy to get a law passed in France? the UK?, Belgium?, the Netherlands?, Germany?, Italy? I suspect it wouldn't take too long before you are looking at serious money compared to the number of US Congresscritters needed.

    Want to really change the level of corruption in the US Congress? Return selection of Senators to the states rather than by direct election. Without Senatorial re-election campaigns to run, it will be impossible for "campaign contributiuons" to affect a Senator's vote.

    --

    You either believe in rational thought or you don't
    1. Re:what multi-million dollar bribes? by Zeinfeld · · Score: 2
      Now, how many Congresscritter equivalents does one have to buy to get a law passed in France? the UK?, Belgium?, the Netherlands?, Germany?, Italy? I suspect it wouldn't take too long before you are looking at serious money compared to the number of US Congresscritters needed.

      There is certainly corruption in most countries. However there is a major difference between individual peculation and institutional corruption which is what we have in the US.

      To get a legislative bill through the UK parliament you have to have the support of the government party. All members interests have to be declared in advance and it is a criminal breach of the rules to offer any sort of bribe to advance legislation. The corruption that brought the Conservative party down was very minor, involving asking questions for cash and lobbying for citizenship applications.

      There is no way that you could get the corrupt Eli-Lilly exception that Bill Frist patriotically attached to the Homeland Security bill. There is no way that the government can claim ignorance of what is passed. Corruption of the Bill Frist type only survives because the Senate rules allow business to be conducted in secret. Go take a look at the UK Hansard web site, anyone can see the exact progress of any bill at any time. MPs go to the Web site to find what is going on.

      Rather than change the constitution as you propose I think that it would suffice to change the rules of the senate. In particular no ammendment to be allows to any bill without a written mover and seconder. All business to be announced on the Congressional Web site.

      The Democrats if they were smart would run the type of campaign that Gingrich ran, only instead of the citizens bill of rights make transparency of the congressional process the issue. Heck, Newt might even lend support since he is rally pissed off at what the party did to him. He thought they believed in what he did, he now realises he was wrong.

      There is no reason why transparency should diminish the power of the Senate. In fact I am trying to convince folk that the only long term way to address the judiciary problem is to increase the threshold for confirmation to 60 votes. The reason for this is simple if you do game theory. At present a President has the effective power to stack the judiciary one way or the other if he can get a pliant congress. So as a result the parties and in particular the GOP have recently been trying to delay appointments until they have sufficient control to install idealogues. If the rules mandate a supermajority in perpetuity the President is forced to be reasonable and so is the Senate since there is nothing to be gained through delay.

      --
      Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
      Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
  66. Jon Johannsen? by LinuxInDallas · · Score: 2

    Does anyone know if this will help the DCSS case with Jon Johansen?

    1. Re:Jon Johannsen? by Dakkus · · Score: 1

      Norway isn't part of the EU, so for him this is neutral.

    2. Re:Jon Johannsen? by schmidt · · Score: 1

      Also, as far as I am concerned, Jon is charged for breaking some law against hacking which is unrelated to copyright.

  67. Conspiracy theory by dark-nl · · Score: 1
    The directive didn't fail at all. That a deadline was passed doesn't mean we're off the hooks -- in the contrary, it means increased pressure to get legislation passed soon.

    This article is just the BSA moaning that it's going too slowly, but they're presenting it as a "serious blow" to their cause. My theory is that the article is based on a BSA press release (notice how it doesn't quote anyone else). Probably the BSA noticed the growing opposition movement, and they're trying to fool activists into thinking they've won so that they stop paying attention.

  68. No, you had it right the first time. by zerofoo · · Score: 4, Funny

    DCMA:

    Digital

    Consumer

    Molestation

    Act

    -ted

  69. And the cheese by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Actually, the girls are nothing special. They have really great cheese however. Five year aged Gouda. AFAIK, they don't export it to the US or Canada, although I have seen the 3 year here in the states. Doesn't compare to the 5 year IMHO.

  70. Mad at Reuters by deblau · · Score: 2
    The BSA, a global body that counts among its members Apple Computer, Microsoft Corp, and Intel Corp, estimates the European software industry loses three billion euros ($3.09 billion) annually due to unauthorized duplication of its products.

    This type of crap is getting really annoying. It's all BS, and I wish the major outlets would stop reporting it. Nothing is being lost! What's really happening is this: potential revenues are being unrealized. They're even projected revenues (note the word "estimates"?), which means the numbers are BS anyway. The truth doesn't sound nearly as sexy, does it? Much more sensational to say 'lost', 'stolen', and 'pirates are everywhere'. Put them all together for more impact (tell me if this sounds familiar):

    "We're losing gazillions of dollars every year because we're surrounded on all sides by terrorist, anti-capitalist, stealing pirates who are trying to destroy our happy, profitable businesses."
    I'm fed up. As a result, I'm going to take a brief leave of my senses, and send out a hearty FUCK YOU to Microsoft, the various ??AAs, all of their lobbyists and spin-doctors, and yes, Reuters.

    Here's more BS from the article:
    The industries argue that the lack of a coherent approach to protecting intellectual property in the digital environment has led to the rise of a black market in pirated material.

    This is not an argument. Using my trusty BS-argument buster, I see that this kind of statement is actually the fallacy of non causa pro causa. But what is the cause they don't mention? To understand where black markets come from, you have to use economics. Black markets only develop where they are profitable, i.e. where the marginal price is higher than the marginal cost. This never occurs in a free market, but does happen when the market is regulated (take drugs, for instance) or when there are not enough players, which is clearly not the case here. In the case of drugs, active regulation drives up the marginal price artifically (it sucks to go to jail, and part of the price of your dime bag compensates your dealer for the risk they take). In the case under consideration, the marginal cost is being driven up by bad IP laws (which Microsoft and the content industry were so excited about, I might add).

    This is the elusive flaw with their argument, and just goes to show that they created their own hell. Now they're complaining about having to live in it. Morons.

    --
    This post expresses my opinion, not that of my employer. And yes, IAAL.
  71. Arise, arise! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Riders of Fair Use!

    Fell deeds awake; legislation and slaughter!
    Disc will be splintered and burner be broken!
    A court day, a red day, ere the DMCA rises.
    Move now, move now, move to Holland!

  72. I agree but I don't by MacAndrew · · Score: 2

    I'm afraid that acronym is another of those words that through relaxed usage has come to mean all of these concoctions, e.g., here. I actually like it better the modern way, as some acronyms are pronounced or said different by different people -- URL -- and acronym to be connotes the abbr. of a common word by squashing letters out of it. OK?

    This source says acronyms are a novel 20th century affliction.

    What amuse me are the words that vary not in sound but by a letter, which sticklers nonetheless insist are entirely different -- farther/further, inquire/enquire, insure/ensure, potato/potatoe (heh-heh -- just kidding -- I wouldn't have let that one go!)

    OK, admittedly I am careful in my writing to follow most of these stupid rules, excepe for splitting infinitives, which I do with abandon if it suits the occasion.

    1. Re:I agree but I don't by ZigMonty · · Score: 2

      What amuse me are the words that vary not in sound but by a letter, which sticklers nonetheless insist are entirely different -- farther/further, inquire/enquire, insure/ensure, potato/potatoe (heh-heh -- just kidding -- I wouldn't have let that one go!)

      Maybe those words sound the same in your accent but they sound different (to varying degrees) in an Australian accent (father vs. ferther) and I'd guess in an English accent as well. Pet peeve: Americans who think "our" and "are" are the same word. These sound completely different in a non-American accent and when you read someone else's post in your head it sounds very wrong.

    2. Re:I agree but I don't by MacAndrew · · Score: 2

      Eh, what do we care what foreigners think? ;-) Americans don't HAVE an accident! Er, accent!

      To be honest, and I'm trying here, I can't fathom how to pronounce "our" and "are" differently. I'll have to bring this one up at dinner. These things make me feel bad as I try to teach my 6 y.o. to spell and feel I must keep apologizing for our language. Verb conjugations doesn't help ("what do you mean 'teared' isn't past tense for 'tear'? well, son, y'see, English is a collection of other languages that it mutilated and mixed and misremembered about until....") Like, why do flammable and inflammable meant the same thing? (Yes, I know the answer, but I will feel silly explaining it to him.)

      The tendency in American English is towards eliminating the "duplicate" word, which is fine by me if we can still speak intelligibly. "Potatoe" refers to an old joke about a certain U.S. vice president. (The sharp-tongued little boy later appeared at the Democratic Convention.)

      Happy holidays!

    3. Re:I agree but I don't by ZigMonty · · Score: 2
      "Our" is pronounced like "owl" without the "L". "Are" is pronounced like "car" but without the "C". OK, that may or may not make it more clear. You pronounce both as the later, right?

      What is the reason for inflammable? I wouldn't have a clue.

      While I sort of like American English for removing some of the stupidities of English (Queue anyone?), I prefer colour to color. It seems more... colourful!

      BTW, inquire/enquire and insure/ensure are pronounced like you'd think they would be: inquire sounds like the word "in" and enquire sounds like the start of the word "enter". That doesn't mean that I can tell which one to use in a given situation or that I can tell when someone else gets it wrong however.

    4. Re:I agree but I don't by MacAndrew · · Score: 1

      My wife pronounces "our" as something like "hour." I pronounce both like the letter R, and I like it that way dammit. My usual argument is that if your meaning is clear and you don't look stupid you're doing OK.

      Inflammable is correct judging from its root "to set fire to". Flammable probably resulted from someone who thought they knew what they were doing, reasoned that "in" meant not (incorrect here) and flammable meant flame-able, so they dropped the "in." Flammable mostly appears on gas trucks and does save two letters.... but means inflammable.

      inquire/enquire and insure/ensure are pretty much dead issues inn American English, settling on inquire and insure for insurance, ensure for "to make sure." American law for some reason uses insure to mean ensure, I don't know why' it also spells judgement as judgment. The origins of this little changes are often quite quaint -- a printer's error one day becomes THE RULE the next. As a lawyer and someone who has done a lot of editing, the language fascinates and repels me. :) I think it's a pretty good language and for better or worse it is becoming the international language. I suppose American English is the most commonly spoken? We have almost 300 million now. (And there are regional dialects here, also.)

      BTW, both British and Australian accents are thought to be quite fetching here.

    5. Re:I agree but I don't by ZigMonty · · Score: 1
      I pretty much agree with your wife (where's she from?). For me, "our" is somewhere in between "hour" and "ow".

      An American saying "are" in place of "our" is pretty unnoticeable. When it is written though, it annoys me because I read posts in *my* inner voice, which naturally has an Australian accent. I don't really care that much though.

      In common usage here inquire/enquire is replaced with the word "ask" and ensure with "make sure" ("I want to ensure..." = "I want to make sure..."). Insure is still used when talking about insurance. Better educated Australians may disagree with me however.

      English blows chunks and I pity anyone who must learn it as a second language but I'm glad my language is becoming the dominate one. :)

      Your last line puzzles me. What is a British accent? Even Australian accents differ. Any area that is sufficiently isolated for a significant period of time will develop its own accent. Unlike America, Australia was settled from the sea. There wasn't an overland drive westward like there was in America. Roads linking our capital cities took a long time to build. When you are an isolated town, sandwiched between the desert and the sea, and the only communication is text-only mail via ship, your pronunciations are going to drift.

      Personally, my favourite accent is Canadian - minus the aboot of course. I have never heard a Canadian say aboot that noticeably though. Least favourite would have to be deep southern American rancher - you know, the kind that shoots Mexicans on sight. I think there is something about our accent that makes people think we are all horse riding, crocodile fighting yahoos. Lets face it, we don't exactly sound like intellectuals ;-)

      Wow, this has to take some kind of record for off-topicness. Better drop my +1.

    6. Re:I agree but I don't by MacAndrew · · Score: 1

      BTW, both British and Australian accents are thought to be quite fetching here.

      (Quoting myself.) Actually lots of foreign accents are considered attractive, unless they're too hard to understand, or German, or maybe Indian or Mexican ... and so on. There's a classist thing in there, and then places like Autralia have been portrayed positively in movies, and we seem to have a whole pile of Australian actors (and a cool scifi show, Farscape). Americans are interested in foreigners, we're very isolated here. Ask one to find New Zealand on a map, however, forget it. And Canadians we are somehow blind to, though they are our #1 trading partner they are taken for granted, whic, uh, irritates many of them.

      For accents, nowadays there is the homogenizing force of TV. That's the English I speak, and I even grew up in LA. I'm sure you see a bunch of shows in "American" whereas I don't see any in "Australian" (barely a hint of one in Farscape -- it was pretty startling listening to the talent interviewed in the DVD extras). Many people who have ethnic or regional accents retain them out of pride. A Southern accent, the only really strong one we have (Boston and Brooklyn come close) is generally pretty acceptable though sometimes looked down upon as uneducated hicksville.

      On stereotypes, the Texans actually get on much better with Mexicans than the supposedly liberal Californians, even though the former has a border many many times as long. It's a completely different mentality, though no one is perfect.

      On language, I think English does a pretty good job, the problem is that it borrows from so many other languages with different rules -- German, old anglo-saxon, French, misc. others. I feel bad teaching my 6 y.o. spelling and pronunciation and verb conjugation, because his logic just doesn't fit what we do. But thank goodness out nouns are genderless! In German the articles even change with the case of non -- passive, dative, active.... As for grammar, oddly enough a lot of our grammar rules were invented about a hundred years ago when someone decided we needed a grammar based on Latin, and many of the rules are bogus.

      So there.

    7. Re:I agree but I don't by ZigMonty · · Score: 1
      You think you are isolated?! We are stuck on an island continent! We are a country of 19 million people with an entire continent to ourselves! Adding to that is the aridness of central Australia. Our cities hug the rim of Australia and you can drive for a day and not see any signs of civilisation. On top of that, we are located in Asia. New Zealand is the only European style country for 10s of thousands of kilometres (read: 10+ hours on a plane). At least you have Canada, although as you say you forget about them.

      There is a simple reason why you haven't seen many good Australian TV shows: there aren't any! Practically all of the TV we see is either American or British. We do make a lot of soap opera and drama, and we export them to many countries but personally, I think they are crap.

      Movies OTOH, we do. Star Wars, the Matrix, Mission Impossible, etc were all made in Sydney. The main actors may have been mostly American but everyone else working on the films were Aussies. LOTR was made in New Zealand but we are pretty much the same country. We joke about each other but New Zealand has to be the country we are closest to culturally.

      I wouldn't worry about us losing our accent. It isn't pride. We are schooled in an Australian accent and no amount of TV really changes that. One thing to note is that most ads are in Australian accents, even foreign companies like McDonalds. America might be homogenising because of how easy it is to travel from one side of the country to the other. You are probably intermixing a lot. The same thing happens inside Australia but I think our accent is pretty safe from American influence. Our culture however *is* being assimilated. Frankly, I don't care. I like how it's worked out so far. We have most of the good of America with only a little of the bad (read: no Australian DMCA and there probably never will be one). If it ever becomes possible to get from America to Australia in under 2 hours, and the passport stuff is softened, then our accent may be in trouble.

      I apologise for the Texas stereotype. It is probably because they are usually portrayed as stupid rednecks in movies. I know it isn't really true. G.W. Bush make this harder to acknowledge however :-).

      I don't particularly mind gender in languages, as long as it is done properly (read: not German!). I'm a mix of Irish and Italian blood (only in Australia or America, eh?) and I quite like Italian as a language. Italian children are not taught spelling because the only exceptions to the very simple rules are the words that kids learn first. Words are spelled phonetically. If you see an "a", it only represents one sound.

      Hmmm... if you reply, you should probably do it by email. This thread was once about the DMCA! It's off the front page now though.

  73. I think, they call it... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...'Euphemism':

    "At the time it was seen as a big victory for copyright holders who wanted existing laws modernized to ensure they would be compensated for the digital distribution of their works."

    So, they want to have it 'modernized'...I'm just about to loose my respect for those guys at Yahoo now.

  74. Re:BSA is changing... by MacAndrew · · Score: 2

    gays can still be Scouts

    No, not according to the relatively conservative nat'l organization. Nor atheists, maybe. If anything they are clamping down. A recent example illustrating philosophical tension within the organization.

    A site...

  75. French DMCA on the way by hysterion · · Score: 4, Informative
    As others have written, the headline is vastly overoptimistic. If the editors had read the following, they'd know that France, for instance, seems in the process of adopting a DMCA-like bill:
    • 2002-12-04 15:16:13 France to introduce own DMCA (articles,news) (rejected)

    Today's Libé previews a new bill introduced by the French government to, in one stroke and all too familiar terms, not only legalize anticopy media , but also prohibit everyone from diffusing, advertising and even making known any means of circumvention. (Google translation.) Meanwhile, no plans to end a 56 tax on blank CDs, which brought the industry 95.3 million in 2001. Sad news from a country which, in more enlightened times, pioneered copyright reduction (to 50 years) and thus enabled such wonderful reissue programs as Chronological Classics.

    1. Re:French DMCA on the way by c_ollier · · Score: 1

      As a "frenchie", I obviously follow news on this subject. The french branch of the european FSF has launched a fund to help fight this forthcoming bill.

      Since 1985, here in France, we have the right to copy media for private use. It is also possible for public & non-profit organizations to adapt existing media for disabled people.

      As such, copy protected CD's are already illegal...

  76. Directive still stands - will still be implemented by Paul+Jakma · · Score: 2

    Errmmm.... has noone cottoned on to the fact that the directive *still* stands? And as such all EU countries are still obligated to pass into local law legislation that implements the Directive. While a directive may contain a deadline for local implementation, missing this deadline does not remove the obligation to implement it.

    --
    I use Friend/Foe + mod-point modifiers as a karma/reputation system.
  77. The answer is simple... by Slur · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Imagine you own a house. One day you leave the door unlocked, thieves enter and steal your television. If the thieves are caught they will be arrested only once. This is because you are only a citizen, and are not afforded any special privileges.

    Now imagine that your door was locked. Thieves break your lock and enter and steal your television. Under the current laws they would still only be arrested once. This is because there are no special laws applying to the lock on your door, and so the theft is not a special case.

    Now imagine you are a big media conglomerate with lobbyists in Washington. You get the government to pass a special law covering the locks on your doors, so that if a thief actually breaks the lock on your door they can be arrested and charged extra-heavily and go to jail for even longer.

    Isn't that excellent? See, in the first case you didn't have a lock on your door, so it could be argued that you were inviting anyone to take your television. Once you put locks on your door, it tells people you don't want them entering your house and stealing your television. But this is still not enough, because there is nothing in the law that says "by having this lock on my door I'm not kidding, I really don't want you to take my television."

    The DMCA is that new special law that says, "locks on doors are extra-specially-explicitly things meant to keep others out."

    Without the DMCA there would be all kinds of confusion and no one would know what locks are for, or what's legal and what's not.

    Aren't you glad we have people in government to clear these things up for us?

    --
    -- thinkyhead software and media
    1. Re:The answer is simple... by BorgDrone · · Score: 2

      The fun starts when you forget your key and get locked out of your house.

      You could get arrested for picking your own lock.

    2. Re:The answer is simple... by Dyolf+Knip · · Score: 2

      This would be funny except that it is exactly what the DMCA is about. You may not have designed the lock, but you do own it, and you can get in trouble for picking it. Excuse me, for telling other people how to pick it.

      --
      Dyolf Knip
  78. YMCA by Zone-MR · · Score: 1

    *** To the tune of YMCA

    http://whichwayup.org/writing/ymca/

  79. Belgium by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Belgium is a country as democratic as Iraq. In Iraq, election results are completely fake, in Belgium however, the government doesn't even bother to ask important questions to the public. This Europe stuff, is not about the people, but about corruption and corporate control. Ironically, we have a left government allowing all this. That leaves me to vote far-right next year.

    1. Re:Belgium by laurensv · · Score: 1

      Belgium is a far more democratic country than Iraq, elections aren't faked in Belgium. If you think that some issues aren't fully adressed by the government, do it yourself, speak out, why is it that your mail doesn't state any issue? We don't have a left government, we don't even have a leftwing government, it's politically in the center, but liberal for the US readers. Youre just making up excuses to vote on Vlaams Blok next year and not feel to guilty if they turn Flanders/Belgium in a oneparty state, much like ...Iraq. Read it from an independant source. Preface of the 2002 Amnesty international report on human rights in Iraq: "Scores of people, including possible prisoners of conscience and armed forces officers suspected of planning to overthrow the government, were executed. Scores of suspected anti-government opponents, including people suspected of having contacts with opposition groups in exile, were arrested. The fate and whereabouts of most of those arrested, including those detained in previous years, remained unknown. Several people were given lengthy prison terms after grossly unfair trials before special courts. Torture and ill-treatment of political prisoners and detainees were systematic. The two Kurdish political parties controlling Iraqi Kurdistan detained prisoners of conscience, and armed political groups were reportedly responsible for abductions and killings" (http://web.amnesty.org/web/ar2002.nsf/mde/iraq!Op en) Now, you anonymous coward, the preface of the one on Belgium: "There were new allegations that criminal suspects were ill-treated by law enforcement officers and that asylum-seekers were ill-treated during forcible deportation operations. By the end of 2001 no one had been brought to justice in connection with the death in 1998 of an asylum-seeker who was asphyxiated after gendarmes pressed a cushion over her face during forcible deportation. There was concern that the treatment of detained child asylum-seekers, who included unaccompanied minors, was not in line with international standards on the treatment of children. There was also concern that new administrative measures introduced to accelerate asylum procedures had eroded access to fair and impartial refugee determination procedures. The level of prison overcrowding, together with understaffing, prompted strikes by prison guards. Four Rwandese nationals were convicted in Belgium of war crimes committed in Rwanda in 1994. A parliamentary inquiry concluded that members of the Belgian government and other Belgian participants were ''morally responsible'' for the circumstances leading to the assassination of Patrice Lumumba in 1961, seven months after he became the first democratically elected prime minister of the newly independent African state of Congo, but found no evidence that they had ordered his ''physical elimination''." (http://web.amnesty.org/web/ar2002.nsf/eur/belgium !Open) See any difference?

  80. Anti-EUCD fight not finished in Belgium by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    EUCD stand for EUropean Copyright Directive.

    In Belgium Association Electronique LIBRE is leading the fight against the directive.

    The problem is that member state of Europe MUST implement this directive into state law. If a legal conflict take place, plaintif can go to the above court (European Justice?) and gain it there.

    The delay in implementing just mean national politics start to understand the issue, but reverting this might be difficult.

    David GLAUDE

    PS: If (You==Belgian) Then contact AEL EndIf

  81. Hurray for ignornace by 00_NOP · · Score: 2

    So in effect the wonderful EU system they have now is in all essence the same as the United states... The fed's make a law and the states HAVE to follow them...

    OK, but I cannot resist faming this twit. The member states of the EU have already agreed to this directive. As part of their agreement they agreed to enact it in domestic law within a three year deadline. Now they have failed to do so they can be taken to court for failing to enact in national law something they had passed via directive.

    So nobody has forced them to do anything, whatever you may think of the DMCA and the European directive the people to blame are you - either because you voted for the politicians who enacted the law, you couldn't be bothered to vote or you didn't get politically active and persuade enough people to vote...or maybe you are wrong?

    1. Re:Hurray for ignornace by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, not so hasty ...
      About the Euro-politicians: they are far beyond any democratic control. It's just the RAW POWER (as Sauron's, by comparison), that listens to NOBODY.

      US have their democratically elected Senate, Representatives' House and President (not to mention the State Legislatures). And in EU? Some populist politicians are being elected; then, they cease their power to some entity as European Commission; then, this commission gives away its power to mafia-like orgs. as WIPO, which is then steered by the lobbying groups (as the music industry or movie industry, to curse both); those lobbyists then impose rules on WIPO, which imposes them back to EC, which imposes them back to the "nation states'" authorities, which impose them back on the people. That's how it works. Tell me, please -- when was the last time you've elected your WIPO representative ?? Or your EC member ?? Have you had any access to the ballot to decide on the policies of WIPO ??

      Certainly, this is NOT a democracy. I'm unhappy with what happens to EU, because my country is supposed to join this block, and I don't think we have any alternative anyway ... But we may join together (East and West of Europe) in our fight for the BETTER, more democratic EU, without any tsar-like 'European Commissioners' or their masters in WIPO and other organisations.

      As for now, I think that to IGNORE the EuroDMCA is the best way out for the member states of the EU, and I don't think that my country's rulers will have such a courage to refuse to comply (as we are a 'candidate state'). HURRAH for every parliament, govt, state and society in EU that has NOT adopted the EuroDMCA. I hope the directive dies as the 'dead code' or how you call the ineffective laws in English :))

      Critto from Poland -- it' me, but I have failed to log in (because of my horrible laziness :))), I even have an e-mail critto@wp.pl (please mail me if you'd like to :)))
      Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year Everyone !! And LET'S KILL DMCA EVERYWHERE !!! (it's losing now in the USA ...)

  82. already illegal by QuantumG · · Score: 2

    Actually it's "unlawful", the difference being you can't got to jail for giving a copy of Operation Flashpoint to your friend so you can play multiplayer at a LAN meet. However, Codemasters can sue you for giving a copy to your friend because if you hadn't given a copy to your friend he might have gone and bought a copy, so they're out the few bucks they make off the $69.95 purchase price.

    --
    How we know is more important than what we know.
  83. Why don't they... by EzInKy · · Score: 2

    ...just get out of the software business? Seriously, they must really be doing something wrong if laws that have worked for years for publishers of other types of works have managed to be profitable I can't imagine why they can't. Books have been copyable for over 50 years, and the "source" is even included with the product, yet they still manage to make money.

    Speaking of books, anyone remember when software used to come with paper manuals? Now that was value!

    --
    Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.
  84. Status of Euro-DMCA by infolib · · Score: 2

    The status of the European Copyright Directive (EUCD) is updated in this wiki.

    I should also point out, that the EUCD is late, not overturned. The countries are still obliged to implement it.

    --
    Any sufficiently advanced libertarian utopia is indistinguishable from government.