Public Hearing On Copyright Circumvention

TimButterfield writes "PUBLIC HEARING SCHEDULE AMENDED (68 FR 19966) The Copyright Office of the Library of Congress is scheduling two new days of public hearings in Washington, D.C., on the possible exemptions to the prohibition against circumvention of technological measures that control access to copyrighted works. In addition, the Copyright Office has cancelled two previously scheduled dates. Public hearings will now be held in Washington, D.C., on Thursday, May 1, 2003, beginning at 2:00 p.m. and on Friday, May 9, 2003, beginning at 9:30 a.m. The Washington, D.C., public hearings will be held at the Postal Rate Commission, 1333 H Street, N.W., Third Floor, Washington, D.C. The public hearings previously scheduled for April 15 and April 30, 2003, have been cancelled. The public hearing scheduled for May 2, 2003, will be conducted at the Postal Rate Commission at 9:30 a.m. As previously announced, hearings will also take place on May 14 and 15 at the UCLA Law School in Los Angeles, Calif. For more information, see the Copyright Office website."

Comments

Issues Websites?

[greenhide]

Although I'd be happy to lend whatever support I could to defending consumer rights in this area, I'm afraid I just don't know enough about the issues involved. I've ready plenty of Slashdot articles in the past, all of which go on and on about intellectual property laws becoming increasingly invasive. Most of these discussions devolve into invectives (is that the right word?...I think so...) against the DMCA, the RIAA, the MPAA, etc.

However, it'd be nice to be pointed to some specific websites that discuss the issues, specific legislation or regulations under review.

For instance, if I were to go to the hearing, what questions can I/should I ask? Will I be able to present any opinions or viewpoints, and what should they be on? I myself am tired of being one of the ones who moans and complains about these issues but then doesn't do anything about it. I'd like to be informed so I can act.

Thanks.

So Who's Going, Huh?

[portege00]

I'm wondering how many Slashdotters that are always quick to proclaim the evils of the DCMA will actually show up? You'll have a much more profound effect on bad laws if you do than by sitting at home racking up karma.

Re:Copyright is a necessity

[freestyle-fiend]

All the slashbots constantly whinge about how copywrite is wrong, patents are obsolete.

I don't think that this true. A lot of people believe that copyright gives legal 'rights' that copyright holders ought not to exercise universally, or that action taken to prevent or punish copyright violations is inappropriate. I think that the complaint is not about patents themselves, but about incompetence and about abuse of the legal process.

Of course, some people really do believe that patents and copyrights are not necessary, but they are a small minority. I agree with them in principle, but pragmatically I think all that is needed is a reversal of recent changes to copyright law and a substantial clamp down on bad patents and the power of groundless patent cases to cost the defendant money.

Let's imagine a world where there is *no* IP. Making a living as a programmer is no longer viable. The whole field of software development will grind to a standstill.

The success of Free Software tends to suggest otherwise.

Do you think patents stiffile inovation?

No. I think that copyrights stiffle creativity. In a (to a large extent) free-market economy, patents promote innovation, unless they are awarded to the wrong party, or for a really obvious 'innovation'. Patent holders taking groundless legal action stiffles innovation.

Imagine a world where if you invent something really cool, all the major hardware companies will mass-produce cheap knockoffs within weeks.

How would patents help me? I will probably have to work with many others and and build on past innovations to invent something really cool. If I have many employees and enough money to license the necessary patents (and apply for my own) then how different from a major hardware company do I look?

If I don't have lots of money and expertise (including other people's) will patents 'protect' my innovations? Will I have any innovations to 'protect'?

You have no incentive to design at all.

Actually, the result is that I have no incentive to publish details of my innovation. Patents are supposed to encourage innovators to disclose details of their innovations. I can still maufacture my product without patents and without anyone knowing exactly how it works for some time.

Companies will grow ever larger.

This seems to be happening anyway.