Slashdot Mirror
E.U. Commission Suggests Permissive Copyright Rule
An anonymous reader submits "ITworld.com is reporting: 'The European Commission on Thursday presented a draft directive that punishes copyright infringement for commercial purposes, but leaves the home music downloader untouched, infuriating the entertainment industry.'"
It's had the microsoft "embrace and extend" applied to it.
It's flooding across the world, the idea that copyright was once a workable solution but now is gradually being more and more perverse
Thanks to many commercial interests, companies are applying pressure to have copyright strengthened in a radical sense
More and more they want not only full control over who makes copies (the original idea) but how you use the copies you get. how you watch them, who you watch them with, what you do with the information on those copies
A home user making a copy of a DVD to have it on their upstares computer as well as their DVD player in the living room is one thing, and is meaninglless in the scheme of things
"they" however want to control you and sya you can't do 'x' or 'y'. when you want to do 'z'
something to think about
In the US, the entire political system is based on money from corporations. As far as I understand, the EU isn't quite the same. Who are the companies bribing? Without money, there really is no way to 'put pressure' on anyone, so what's the tactic?
I'm sure most of the 'pressure' is coming from US companies, which begs the question, why does the EU care at all? Profits are only then to be made on selling the CDs and hosting concerts; Is there really all that much money coming through Europe to make it a big deal? In the US, every penny an artist or company makes is eventually going back into the economy, whether through buying a mansion in the Hills, or buying off a Senator. It's not like US artists are investing millions in real estate in England, and I don't think the politicians are quite so owned.
GL
There are more people under EU law than there are under US law, and the EU is just starting to flex its' muscles a bit more. Negotiation is the key for getting your own way, either for member states or those outside the boundaries. Trying to impose a solution (by anyone, even founder member-states) is becoming more and more difficult.
Has anyone else noticed that plain 'ole numbers are becoming more important over time ? China and India are being cited as the future powerhouses of global commerce; the US and (to a lesser extent) the EU are outsourcing huge chunks of what would have been bread-and-butter work to external countries, etc. Maybe EU expansion isn't such a bad idea after all... Perhaps it'll be Russia next :-)
Simon
Physicists get Hadrons!
This law sounds like it's consumer-friendly, perhaps creating some much-needed balance, but it really isn't. In fact, it's a broad expansion of current law that's bad for everyone that uses any kind of p2p, for legitimate reasons or otherwise.
Copyright infringement would still be a civil crime so the content industries could still go after consumers on their own, just like they can now -- the proposed legislation would change criminal law. Also (obviously) the existing law covers copyright infringement for profit as copyright infringement for profit is still copyright infringement.
So what's the point of the new law? Read closely:
Peer-to-peer file-sharing services that encourage copyright infringement and make money from advertising are commercial, according to the Commission. "That is illegal and should be stopped," the Commission said. Examples of file sharing services are Kazaa and Morpheus.
Got it yet?
What they're saying: "Criminal sanctions only apply when copyright infringement is carried out intentionally and for commercial purposes."
What they want to dupe the public into hearing: "You can download all you want as long as no money is involved."
What they mean: "Copyright infringement through p2p services hurts the profits of companies that make large campaign contributions. P2P companies produce highly functional p2p software which has a primary function of facilitating copyright infringement because there is a financial incentive to do so (adware/spyware). This aspect of the p2p business can be used to legitimate government attacks in order to shut down those businesses."
What this means for you: Say goodbye to KaZaA and other useful (meaning large, meaning commercially-supported) networks.
From another board
"I wish I could record a day's work and then sell that recording over and over and over to anyone who needed that day's work done for them.
Before geeks invented sound recording, musicians sang for their supper.
Now technology has come full circle, and it's back to singing for their supper--and those pampered, bloated, overpaid Holyweird types are scared stiff they might have to work for a living!
And why not?
Technology has ruined the careers of other blue collar workers--now it's the turn of entertainers, who after all are nothing but another kind of blue collar worker."
They clamped down at the College on P2P. I used to bring a Zip Disk along and download a few samples using the lab's high speed access. I "met" all of my favorite artists that way. Example: I had no idea of who "Enya" was, but I got one of her songs on one of my kinda random downloads, I liked it. I found several more of hers. Liked them too. Next thing I know, when I was in any record store, I was looking for her CD's... I think I have her complete set now ( except for one compilation CD ). These were all purchased.
Now that I have been prohibited from sampling the music, I find something odd happening. Although I still go into the record store, there is now nothing running through my head that I want to buy. I see rows upon rows of CD's, but to me they are just so much clutter - I have no idea what they are - they may as well be in another language. I just do not see a thing I'm specifically looking for
I know what the problem is... I do not listen to the radio anymore. They would continuously play the hot list, interspersed with as much jabber as they thought I would tolerate. Problem is now its not just the "top 40" I have to choose from... its literally thousands of different titles in the store... and I don't know the slightest thing about any of the new ones.. I just remember some of the oldies from earlier years.
Yes, the store does have listening kiosks, but each only has access to maybe 5 CD's, and I am quite uncomfortable having to stand in one spot for several minutes at a time trying to listen to them. Its not at all like queueing the disk up I made at College and having it play in the background while I do my homework, then if something strikes me while listening, reopening the jukebox window to see what it was. Most of the stuff I got at College was crap anyway, but there were a few gems in it, such as Enya and others. Well, maybe not crap - because music preferences are so unique to each individual, but definitely not mine.
I remember when I used to get excited about Baseball games. Then they had a strike. During the strike, I found something else to do. Guess what, I haven't been back to a game since! Now, it seems I take just about as much interest in how far some baseball player hits the friggen ball as I suspect he cares how I did on my calculus exam. I find once I "get out of sync" with something, I lose interest in it.
Yes, I guess the **AA may have won this one on me - as not only have I not downloaded for about 4 months now, nor have I had any reason to buy any recordings either.
I am not for sure that they really wanted what they won.
"Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]
I sat browsing the Prelinger archive last night, and download three or four movies.
From "The Terrible Truth" (1951): "Some say the reds are promoting dope traffic in the United States to undermine national moral. They did it in China a few years back. It's certainly true that the increased use of narcotics plays right into their hands."
Oookay... Sounded a little paranoid, but I didn't think much more about it. After all, I've heard of McCartyism, and know it was blown out of proportions. The next movie was about pornographic litterature (Yeah, yeah, I know I downloaded some of the more sensational ones, but I wanted entertainment) :
"Perversion for Profit" (ca. 1964-1965): "This moral decay weakens our resistance to the onslaught of the Communist masters of deceit."
Uh. Two movies in a row, selected at (pretty much) random, made over 10 years apart. Both blaming communism for plotting to destroy the nation. If I've downloaded more movies from the archive, I'm sure I would have found more of the same.
Anyway... This made me think of Michael Moore's "Bowling for Columbine", and what the movie says about fear being used to make the public act in certain ways or accept whatever are presented to them. Sample quote: "The media, the corporations, the politicans, have all done such a good job of scaring the American public, it has come to the point that they don't have to give any reason at all."
If this is how it works, can single words have the power to trigger these effects? Don't forget how hard it is to say no to a law that has "patriotic" as part of it's name (Because saying "no" would mean UNpatriotic, and you KNOW you either are with us or against us).
If shouting "communist" at things and people you wanted to get rid of worked in the 50's and 60's, certainly linking the word "terrorist" to illegal copying should have some effect on public opinion and lawmakers.
Seems to me like "terrorist" is the fnord of our time.
I shall go and tell the indestructible man that someone plans to murder him.