DMCA-Alikes Sweep Europe
D4C5CE continues:
"Earlier implementations have been reported from Austria, Denmark, Greece and Italy.
Legal scholars consider the directive itself an invalid "monstrosity", and the German law unconstitutional. In fact, this legislation is viewed as so terribly awful that even from the U.S., the EFF tried to prevent it in a rare intervention overseas.
Declaring that the circumvention rather than the use of Copy Protection is a Crime, the German parliament threatens to make things even worse by adopting a "second stage" with further steps to impose DRM and additional levies later this year, but unsurprisingly, all of the issues that DMCA-style laws have become notorious for are already there: Overbreadth, overprotection of technical measures, and Chilling Effects aplenty.
Record companies eagerly awaiting this "lex Bertelsmann" have already caused ISPs to send out warning letters to P2P users for alleged copyright infringement, and are expected to take legal action against individual users of file-sharing networks, following in the footsteps of RIAA.
Confirming the fears expressed by Alan Cox on Slashdot, computer gurus will soon find no place left to go even on the European side of the pond, and the Free-X "Independence Day" XBox exploit posted by one brave German just in time before this dismal day may well have been one of the very last legal disclosures in this part of the world as well."
Consensual sex is boring.
One of the main reasons that the DMCA has caused so little controversy in mainstream American society (no, Slashdot is not mainstream) is that the conventional media has pretty much refused to cover it.
I'm just curious but have any Slashdot readers from Germany, Austria, Denmark, Greece, or Italy noticed any significant coverage in the media of these euro-DMCA laws? Also, what does the local reaction seem to be? Do most people know enough about the issues to care?
http://yetanotherpoliticalrant.blogspot.com
[article]"6.1 Makes it illegal to circumvent a protection measure. Note that there is no requirement to show that the person who does the circumvention did it in order to infringe copyright law. Circumventing for the sake of making a copy of a music file you have bought in order to listen to it on your portable MP3 player is just as illegal as circumventing in order to put the music on Napster."
whats the point of creating technology that plays compressed music files to enable us to carry around loads of our (paid for) music in a small package if they make it illegal. the whole idea was to make it easy to listen to all of my CD's anywhere without a huge CD wallet bulging at the seams. the napster phenomenon was a different issue totaly, but now it's twisting MP3's from the beautiful thing they were, to a taboo that can land you in jail.
it's not the technology's fault, it's the users fault. guns don't kill people, people kill people - right? well, MP3 players don't steal MP3's. if i can no longer rip MY CD's and upload them to MY player without pissing off some litigator somewhere, then -- F*#% the bozos.
I personally went to the EP for 3 days last week and there really are an incredible amount of MEPs who did not have any idea at all about how bad the current proposal is and who became quite supportive of us after we explained the situation to them. Informing politicians is not the job of the media, but largely of their assistants. Informing the assistants is a job of lobbying groups and individuals.
If you don't contact any politicians or their assistants, you cannot expect them to hear your concerns (although it would be really nice, of course). They vote on about 60 dossiers per week in the EP, so they just don't have the time to go actively looking for information about each and every one of those. Each party has its own specialist for different subjects. The specialists from each faction then create a voting list together, which more often than not is followed blindly by the rest of the faction (since they don't know anything about the dossier).
This is obviously not an ideal situation, since those specialists often have an agenda to push. So informing as many politicians as possible about your point of view is indeed what is necessary. Some will refer you to their local specialist, but most certainly not all of them.
Donate free food here
Looking at the comments that have been posted so far, most appear to be around the "America vs Europe" contest that is ongoing on Slashdot, or "Who do we blame for this?" along with the usually lame trolls.
/. after all...
How about instead, people put some thought into the possibilities of beating some sort of system and what the actual outcome of such regulation would be? There are a lot of clever people in this community and occasionally it's nice to hear what one of them has to say.
1. Will it just be the large coporates who put out DRM protecred media meaing that people who do not get the share of the consumers wallet.
2. Is this going to be like prohibition in the '20s where speakeasy joints for music trading spring up around the world.
3. How practical is it to build an encrypted freenet or something entirely separate from the regular 'Internet' which would allow a sort haven from this type of legislation?
4. Will we just end up as a fractional online society where certain geographical areas of the world (Far East, emerging African states) continue to pump out copies by the ton?
Anyone care to put in a serious comment?
Nah! This is
I remember hearing a BBC article on the difference betwee the Finnish and British governments. You (yes, you, Joe Public, even Joe Foreigner) can just walk in off the street to the residence of the Finnish Prime Minister, and ask to see any government related document. And they don't peer at you in a suspicious manner and tell you they'll get back to you in two years after checking your security clearance, they smile and fetch it straight away, and get you coffee while you're waiting. For example, they fetched some of the personal correspondance between Tony Blair and the Finnish Prime Minister, the actual original letters, and just handed them over, no questions, no bullshit.
Contrast with asking for copies of the same correspondance in the UK. The UK Freedom of Information act gives you every right to see them, but when the BBC asked for them, they were given the run around, passed from department to department in Whitehall, each one of which expressed amazement that anyone would ask for this. They were eventually fobbed off by being told that such correspondance was classified, too secret to be seen. They said that they'd already seen it, and that it talked mostly about football. This produced outright disbelief, and vague threats about carrying out "further investigation" on the reporter.
I think that sums up the spectrum in Europe. In some places, there is a genuine openness and willingness to trust Joe Public. In others, the citizen is treated with suspicion and disdain.
My hope is that we move towards the Finnish position. My fear is that we'll all end up more like Britain.
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.