Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Euro DMCA Fails

Posted by Hemos on from the too-bad-so-sad dept.

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.

6 of 240 comments (clear)

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

    Now when will the USA version fall?

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

  2. 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.

    --

    ====
    Crudely Drawn Games
  3. 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!

  4. 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.

  5. 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
  6. 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