Slashdot Mirror
EU IP Enforcement Directive Criticized
wiredog writes "A commentary at ZDNet UK concerning the proposed EU IP Enforcement Directive describes it as being as bad as, or possibly worse than, the American DMCA. Some snippets: 'You want to change the tyres on your 2006 model Ford Prefect? Anything other than genuine Ford tyres -- with the genuine Ford ID chip -- will disable your car. In the brave new world of the Directive, singing ... in public with your hat on the floor would be a crime,... You can imagine how much the police are going to enjoy having to cope with that.' It closes with the observation that "intellectual property is verging on thought crime."" Civil liberties groups have sent a letter to EU urging that the proposal be rejected.
of the dictum that if you make enough laws then everyone can be a criminal
I rember when the CPTEA was upheld recently, it was upheald because the US Supreme Court found that it had been Congress's intention to harmonize US Copyright Law with that of Europe, not the intent to create a perpetual term of copyright.
As much as I am unhappy with the DMCA, I think that the criticism that the US is more unballanced in this regard than Europe is not accurate. Europe has been the leader in copyright terms.
It seems that the EC (European Commission) is trying to create a market for patent and copyright driven businesses by suggesting that they can provide better protection than the US. The US may try to match. the fundamental problem is that:
1: Unballanced protections such as we have today do NOT help produce innovation and will only relate to higher R&D costs which have to be passed on to the consumer and
2: Every other nation in the world will be forced to play this game of "I can offer you at least as much protection as they can."
This is a scary situation. I think we need to fight this one NOW.
LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
And compromisers are the worst of the bunch. There is no compromise. IP is thought crime, it's not verging on it. In any form, it is evil.
-Libertarian secular transhumanist
Dent is a singularly poor moniker for a car.
No person creates anything except on the back of an unbroken chain of human culture, all ideas and concepts are the refinement of untold precedents, and the mere concept of defining these as the "property" of individuals or groups is a vile and sleazy attempt to create monopolies of thought.
What we call "creativity" is in fact the process of digesting and reformulating a huge number of existing concepts, ideas, patterns, and principles. Nobody creates anything from a blank slate, indeed the concept of a human being without the cultural baggage of a million years is a joke.
The good news is that any organization that closes itself off from the cultural mainstream becomes as relevant as an artist forever trying to protect that 'one big hit' instead of looking to create another one.
So, while this seems an inevitable symptom of today's cozy partnership between big business and big government, it won't last. The revolution always comes from those, with nothing to lose, who have everything to gain.
Ceci n'est pas une signature
I stay in Singapore, and with the recent signing of an Free Trade Agreement with the US, the biggest fear is that broad laws like the DMCA will get passed here. If Europe does something like that, then it is only a matter of time before such silly laws get passed here. Let's hope this idiocy ends soon, although I'm not too optimistic...
Never underestimate the predictability of human stupidity...
It closes with the observation that "intellectual property is verging on thought crime."
/. I just wish people would quit trying to make parallels to Orwell's work every time they see something that threatens their liberty. It's the intellectual equivalent of solving philosophical problems using Dr. Seuss analogies.
This is a rather crass assumption. "Thought crime" gives the gov't control over what you think; this ip measure is just another over-excited corporate-sponsored piece of legislation. Don't get me wrong here--I don't like this garbage any more than the rest of
I read the article, and all I found was a few sensationalist generalities coupled with unsubstantiated analysis. Why not cite some of the injustices that the American DMCA has caused? Or talk about the long-term economic impact of creating all these false barriers to entry, rather than a few vauge assumptions? Nay, it's simply Orwellian.
"God is a comedian playing to an audience too afraid to laugh." -Voltaire
In fact, they could even have the ID chip shut off after a year, requiring people to buy new tyres from Ford on yearly basis no matter what the wear/tear/condition was.
Is it just me? Or are lawmakers and governments abroad focussing on creating legislation that protects IP rights (read corporations) over more pressing and populist laws?
People starve in the streets on all continents.
Tons of people not covered by a proper medicare system (U.S).
There are some seriously screwed up priorities in place by elected officials.
The U.S. "liberates: Iraq and what is the first major undertaking shortly thereafter??
Stabilize the country by providing policing and security to it's citizens?
Bring in food aid?
Nope!! Have Hilary Rosen draught IP laws ASAP for Iraq. Keep that technological world leader Iraq in check.
So much for the Iraqi's being liberated. Not counting their oil of course.
Oh brother...
The DMCA was actually better than this proposal. If a web site was found to hold infringing material, it was not liable if they had no direct control over posting the material, but acted promptly to remove it. This law does not offer these protections to web site owners. This is both good and bad.
The bad: It makes more people potentially liable for infringement.
The good: This protection has been used as a cudgel by the content industry. At least we are not handing them a "or else" weapon here. It also makes this easier to fight.
As an aside: Anyone else find it strange that a stated purpose of this proposal was stopping the sale of counterfit automobile spare parts?
LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
NOTE: I did not RTFA.
This is a general statement about IP Laws and IP protection.
The highly developed, rich, nations (G7 - US, Europe, Japan) are moving away from manufacturing physical products. The companies in these countries will design a product and then contract a non-G7 country to do the actual manufacturing. You get parts made in China, assembled in Malaysia etc.
In reality any country can provide the design and the factories will make it. If the designs came from the countries that now have the factories then there would be no reason to involve the G7 countries except as markets. The value added provided by the G7 countries are the financing, original designs, and then the sales and marketing. The finacial, legal, design and marketing crap is all Intellectual Property.
If there were no Intellectual Property Laws the "rich" countries would end up just being investors and markets into which the goods are shipped. After some years all the money would flow out of these "rich" countries to the countries that actually made stuff and there would be no more money to finance third world factories. But that would be OK the third world would finance it themselves, now being rich.
So it is in a non-manufacturing country's best interest to accumulate as much IP as possible. Since IP is really a legal fiction (physical property can be fenced and protected) The more IP laws you have the more IP you have (in theory, in reality as you choke off the sharing of intellectual property less and less is created).
It is in the US interest to have as many bogus patents and restrictive copyrights as possible. Any country that does not recognize US patents and copyright are denied access to our markets (the only leverage besides military action we have). If a company patents the "method of living by breathing oxygen" it is in the US interest to push that claim and help the company collect money from all the other people on Earth. The US gov. can then tax that income. If all the IP went away the US gov could only live on sales taxes for a few decades as Americans bought cheap DVD players made on the Pacific rim and then revenue would dry up.
By then maybe we could become a source of cheap labor and a peaceful, rich, formerly third world country might locate a few factories here so we common people could actually make a living.
If the US wants to prevent that they need to back up stupid evil companies like Microsoft as they steal money from anyone who wants to use a computer worldwide. If MS Windows went away, the US would get no revenue from a computer sale since it would probably be manufactured in a Chinese Army Prison camp using slave labor and run English Language Linux software written in India. The only income the gov would get would be from the income tax being paid by a minimum wage sales clerk at CompUSA.
Repeat this scenario for all the other highly developed, post-industrial countries and you get the reason for all these stupid IP laws getting passed. They are frightened for their future existence.
If cops had no fundamental understanding of the functioning of a water pistol, then they probably would. That's why we're having the current problem - lawmakers have absolutely no idea how these systems work, so all they have to go on is the info from industry shills.
-Looking for a job as a materials chemist or multivariat
Interesting:
/. or by the suits. Make your own mind up with research. (and no, i didnt mean to say make up your own mind.)
"Apart from the economic and social consequences, this phenomenon infringes on labour legislation, tax legislation, health legislation and the legislation on product safety."
Reminds me of the Nazis... the jews were infringing upon their free rights as well.
Now our side:
"under the proposed directive, EU Member States will have to criminalise street music" This is already illegal: "COTT is entitled under the Copyright Act to charge licensing fees for the public performance of its music repertoire by users. Further the charge is always against the promoter of the event or the proprietor of the premises accordingly." [COTT]
This article may seem to indicate that street bands will be prosecuted: only if the proprietor of the store is charging for playing. In Chicago, street musicians do not charge for their covers of other bands, they are given alms. The comments made on both sides are made to instill fear. Please dont get spun by
--
"And suddenly you realize you were looking in the wrong place."
--Radiohead--
"this is the gloaming"
radiohead
This is what revlolutions are for. Here in the U.S. the instructions for such are in the Declaration of Independence:
That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.
Excessive forking causes un-wanted children.
I'm hoping this part was a joke; when you're a small band trying to get exposure, making money from CD sales is not a priority. If you feel it is, you're in the wrong business.
The point of performing arts of all kinds is to get to perform, to have people enjoy ones work and to get it out to as many people as possible. Napster is an excellent method for this; selling CD's isn't. Not even when you're a big, well known band will CD sales take off particularly much (unless you have a juggernaut marketing machine behind you).
I'd be positively thrilled if half a dozen people would download one of my songs from Napster. If enough people do, I can start playing the local scene for more money; I will be better known. And the real fans will still buy a CD; they're even more likely to do so if they have heard the songs already.
Unless you don't believe in your product (bad music, lousy recording, no good production), freely available tracks are pure goood marketing, leading to exposure, more plays and more sales.
There's a magazine in the UK called 'Private Eye'. One of the things it does is called 'Warballs', which is basically sending up anyone who references 11/9 inappropriately as a comment or justification for some action. Your comment is deserving of submission.
Do you expect the world to stop just because of an atrocity on your soil ? How arrogant can you get ? If you look long enough back in time, you'd probably be able to come up with a sufficiently-bad atrocity on every day of the year. You need perspective.
Yes, September 11th was "a bad thing". Yes, you should try to prevent it from happening again. Yes, you should mourn those who died. Yes, you should get on with your lives, and No, you should not try and associate anything you don't like with such an atrocity. Frankly, you cheapen it by doing so.
I don't particularly think this comment will get anywhere on Slashdot - it's a mostly-US board after all. It still needed saying.
Simon.
Physicists get Hadrons!
Gee, seems to me that a bunch of non-Americans were laughing at us about DMCA issues. IIRC, things like this would NEVER happen outside of the US because they weren't dominated by capitalism.
[ sound of crickets ]
Yeah, I thought so. Now it isn't so funny, is it? So step up and show us how it is done. Show us how to fight these types of laws. Please, prove to us how things are supposed to be done. In all seriousness, I hope you can, because I want there to be somewhere I can move to when things get totally out of control here.
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
Fat chance. The EU is a huge bureaucracy. European don't even know the names of the EU commissars, and the Commission cultivates the virtue of secret and opacity with a success that would have made Beria jealous.
So public opinion has really no impact whatsoever on the bureaucrats. What matters is the lobbyists. According to the Wall Street Journal, there are about 10,000 lobbyists in Brussels. (I believe this doesn't include employees of the larger lobby cabinets).
Large companies are therefore overrepresented in Brussels. Contrary to what naive Americans can think, established companies love the thick layers of bureaucracy and the entanglements of redtape. Why? Because it allows them to:
1. Keep startup competitors out of their business by making it too difficult to enter the field,
2. Pass their pet legislations through coatroom deals.
Europeans wanted a super-state, they've got it. Oh wait... Cancel that. Nobody told the poor schmucks that they would eventually end up in a remake of the Ottoman Empire.
--
Mad science! Robots! Underwear! Cute girls! Full comic online! http://www.girlgeniusonline.com/
> If we don't stamp that out, the incentives for industrial innovation and cultural creativity will
> be weakened.
Hey, I've got a great idea on how to improve the safety and useful life time of a set of tires for my Ford automobile. Oh, too bad I don't have the legal right to use non-Ford approved tires and my car refuses to run so I can't test my idea on my own Ford car. Guess it's now illegal for me to have ideas on how to improve tires, so I won't waste my time with such safety innovations. Or any ideas for other products/markets/industries either. As a chip designer, am I going to be arrested every time I think of a way to improve an electronic product?? I'm not allowed to get sick of my cheesy universal TV remote, gut the curcuitry and put in an entirely new circuit that better suits my needs, because I put it in a plastic remote "case" made by RCA or some other big company like that? Will that plastic shell radio in to the mothership that I replaced the circuit board and order a set of lots of guys with big guns to take me in for re-educationing?
Yea. This law is going to be great for innovation!!!!!!
This proposal "Leapfrogs" the DMCA in a number of significant ways by targetting many areas outside the scope of copyright law (spare auto parts for example).
:-P
The CPTEA was a US attempt to keep up with the EU, this is an attempt by the EU to keep up with the US (DMCA) but also establish a leadership position in the "We can protect your rights."
Also notice that I said that "unballanced protections" are not helpful for innovation. Some protection is very helpful, but let me ask you: what is the difference in software IP value if it is protected for 100 years (under the CPTEA) rather than 80? Will be ever get to the point that we are building *any* sort of intellectual or creative commons as envisioned by the framers of the US COnstitution?
despite the anti-IP rhetoric of the "free beer" crowd, the cold hard truth is that the strength and breadth of US IP law are among the prime factors for the technological leadership of the US.
I disagree. Lets look at the key inventions of the 20th century and see when they were made:
1: Radio
2: Telephone
3: Television
4: Computer
5: TCP/IP
TCP/IP is an open standard. The computer was developed independently by US and German sources but was only militarily used by the US (the original Z-1 was even destroyed by teh Nazi's iirc). Most of the early computer research was publically available.
Radio, television, and telephones (including early electrokenetic switches) were all invented in the US at a time when patent laws were considerably weaker than they are today!
The rational for the extension of patent and copyright terms has to do with the idea that this allows companies to invest larger sums of money in R&D or equivalent processes and pay them off over a longer period before their rights expire.
This does not favor "more research" although it does favor "bigger projects and expenditures." So rather than research and develop in incriments, the corporations research bigger projects. And they move where they can milk more money from the system (so in that sense you have a point).
BUT-- the US became the world leader in technology because of the free flow of information-- that even a farmhand could read about electronics in the early day and understand the problems involved to the point of being able to invent the scanning system used by televisions.
Your point about North Korea is completely off-base. North Korea has neither the resources nor the education to do that. Here is a better example:
When Iceland becomes the world leader in Geothermal energy technology.... Oh, wait, they are
LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
I always see people from the other side of the "pond" saying how glad they are they don't live in America. Also many times I've read how they'd NEVER live here and would move if the same thing happened there.
Well its almost put up or shut up time. It will be interesting to see if people actually move because of this.
Note: I'm not trolling here, I am actually interested to see what happens. There has been a lot of talk and commotion from some people about never stepping foot in America because of the DMCA.
If you wanna get rich, you know that payback is a bitch
Does anyone else feel that this is the beginning of the end?
The RIAA and MPAA are spreading their filth outwards from the US, and trying to make it legally mandatory to implement DRM at the hardware level. The big companies only product anymore is profit, and they're trying to maximise it by elimating cash-sinks like manufacturing and employees. The biggest governments are trying to restrict the movements, actions, and tongues of their citizens in any way they can, and are starting to use those sabres they've been rattling for decades. They also don't seem to believe that their lies even have to be believable or verifiable anymore.
For nearly a quarter century (when I started following current events), I've been of the attitude that it's no worse than it's always been--that it only seems horrific because we're living through it. Now though, I don't know. Every citizen in the "Free Western World" is facing the prospect of being made a criminal, and subject to any punishment their government(s) feel like doling out that day--regardless of any of the things that have been established as basic undeniable human rights.
Frankly, I'm scared for the first time since the Iranian Hostage crisis. I'm afraid the world WILL go out, not with a bang but with a whimper.
"People who do stupid things with hazardous materials often die." -- Jim Davidson on alt.folklore.urban
``The biggest weapon people have against products that they believe infringe on their rights is to simply stop buying those products.'' :)
Maybe I'm too pessimistic about it, but I think it won't be that easy. You may say that if one doesn't like a product - then he can buy from different producent. But what if most of producers applies this prohibitive policy? And there is no manufacturer of similar product with no such `feature'. Of course there is possibility of ``magic-hand-of-market'' effect, and such manufacturer will appear... but bear in mind one of the important sentences: ``corporations are evil''
Unfortunately, this DMCA-style Directive is a European Directive, so voters won't blame their own governments. And there is simply no way to vote out "the Administration" in Europe. You can't even get rid of them when it turns out they are corrupt, for goodness sake!
Paul "Say no to feeping creaturism"
Well, that's one hope. The other hope is that the US remains relatively free, so Europeans can make Linus' choice.
Earth to US... Earth to US... it's from you the cancer is spreading. They managed to push through the DMCA in the USA, so now they get even bolder in the EU. And next round they'll push for DMCA II in the US being even worse than the current one. RIAA and MPAA are the ones pushing the most for IP totalitarism, did you ever catch what the last A means?
That the EU is even more disconnected from the individual citizens than in the US made the job so much easier for the american IP thugs, also called lobbyists. US corporations want to patent and copyright Everything(tm) permanently and thus control the world economy, just look at all the stupid patents the USPO accepts. Not to mention how important it was to get the "proper" IP laws in Iraq before the people gets a say in it.
Actually I put a lot of faith in Eastern Europe too - they may still have more sense when it comes to copyright, unlike the West and most of all the US which appears to be boiled like a frog already.
Kjella
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Whoa there, Chicken Little. A couple more IP laws != Orwellian Nightmare. The good old gov't might be trying to restrict its citizens, but such things have been tried in the past and all have failed, because the masses will happily break any law that they don't agree with. The more the government undermines its credibility, the fewer people will listen to them. We're all criminals already; who cares? And more IP laws might even be a good thing for all us ruthless criminal types.
It's been said that "information wants to be free", but it's closer to reality to say that information cannot be effectively controlled. Another poster mentioned that you can put a fence around physical property to protect your rights to said property. But if enough people jump that fence, then where are your property rights? All of this legislation amounts to nothing more than a fence that can be jumped with the click of a button. The public is contesting the corporations' right to their IP by wantonly breaking whatever laws get passed concerning it. Did Prohibition stop anyone from drinking? Did the War on Drugs make it any more difficult to purchase whatever recreational chemical you desire? No and no.
This legislation will most likely accomplish the same thing that Prohibition and the War on Drugs did: It will create a thriving black market where people can buy what they want to buy at prices that they think are fair. The fact that it's illegal will stop only the tiny percentage of people who get caught. I say the IP lords should pass as many laws as they possibly can. They'll turn piracy from a small difference in quarterly profits to a booming industry that will outcompete them at every turn. The less legal piracy is, the more profitable it will become. Already in Malaysia, a pirated CD costs around one-fifth what an official copy costs, and of course the pirates have much better sales than the manufacturers.
And as far as DRM is concerned, I wouldn't worry about that either. There will be a way around it, even if the hardware required is prohibitively expensive. Nobody had any reason to spend money on a still until Prohibition came around and turned stills into profit machines. Nobody owned private chemical labs until the War on Drugs made chemistry a profitable hobby. DRM will just give hardware hackers a way to print money. I'm sure that Palladium is uncrackable in the same way that the Titanic was unsinkable.
So relax! These laws just give the industry enough rope to hang itself with, and the black marketeers a reason to start selling audio and video media. I for one am looking forward to all those cheap CDs and DVDs I'll be able to buy.
Ph-nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn.