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.
Hey, I'm not trying to say that no matter what the people want all of the politicians backed by funding from large corporations are going to pass this law...OK maybe I am. But, maybe when this abuse of power and creation of "thought crime" laws becomes a worldwide phenomenon, we'll have an easier time fighting it. Then again, maybe I'm too optimistic.
Let's get one thing perfectly clear, I did not vote for George W Bush, and I do not endorse what he does or says.
"
``Internal Market Commissioner Frits Bolkestein said: "Pirates and counterfeiters are in effect stealing from right holders the fair payment they deserve for their work. If we don't stamp that out, the incentives for industrial innovation and cultural creativity will be weakened. That would threaten Europe's competitiveness and its cultural diversity and dynamism. So we have to get tough with the pirates and counterfeiters and make sure they can find no safe havens in the EU.''
I liked the part about weakening the creativity and innovation. Bleh. Political ``new-speach''.
They don't make tires either.
I'd be more concerned about InkJet printer manufacturers doing this... oh wait they already do... thats why I have a LaserJet...
Damnit, people, stop outlawing tools which have multiple uses. Outlaw the bad uses and you don't have any issues. I want to copy software illegally. That's already illegal. Now I want to run linux on my coke can. Why should that be illegal? Because copying software is not illegal enough. Isn't legality a boolean? Does it need to be compounded by superfluous laws?
I know the gun thing is probably overused, but let's say I want a high pressure water gun so I can soak my buddy with water. This is like outlawing this water pistol because someone else put bleach in theirs and sprayed it in the eyes of a law enforcement officer. Blinding a cop is illegal, and for good reason. Why make owning a water pistol illegal?
[end rant]A very good article. The only problem I see is that if people completely stopped buying music from the RIAA that the RIAA would use what was left of its money to go completely apeshit SCO like against anyone who ever heard one of their songs.
I like this part better:
"Will this Directive mean that people buying a fake watch from a market stall will be held liable for IPR infringement ?
No. The act of buying is not subject to any intellectual property right. "
If buying illgal copies is NOT subject to any intellectual property right, how could downloading for free ever be?
True ravers don't need drugs
They state in the FAQ that:
40% of software in use worldwide is believed to be pirated, and 37% in the EU (= loss of revenue of 2.9 billion euros annually).(2)
Worldwide, 36% of all music CDs and cassettes sold are pirated (total sales of pirated goods is 5 billion units).
The usual question I have is "how did they come up with those numbers???" At the very bottom of the page it says they are from BSA in case of software. This means that the BSA way of calculating actually is being used, THAT is scary. They also claim that 36% of all music CD's sold are pirated. Why dont they figure out the same figure of sold pirated copies of sotftware instead of just citing BSA??
True ravers don't need drugs
Anything other than genuine Ford tyres -- with the genuine Ford ID chip -- will disable your car.
Interchangeable parts - Any part you want so long as it's black... otherwise... all your tyres are belong to us!
FAQ from EU IP directive
i ntprop/news/index.htm
Quote :
The proposal has a number of safeguard clauses: * the proposal restates the general principles of intellectual property rights law, namely that procedures should be fair, not unnecessarily complicated, slow or costly and should not create barriers to 'legitimate trade' * any penalties applied to offenders should be 'effective, proportionate and deterrent' i.e. the penalty should fit the crime * where the Directive allows for seizure of suspect goods for evidence, the company or person whose goods have been seized can ask for a review of the seizure. Furthermore, the judge can make the rightholder pay a refundable guarantee which will be forfeit if the case brought is unfounded * where the Directive allows for a court to force someone involved in handling infringing goods to reveal who they bought the illegal goods from, this can only be done under certain conditions (e.g. where this would not incriminate the person giving the information, so-called right to avoid self-incrimination) * where the Directive allows for 'interlocutory injunctions' (an injunction in advance of a decision on the merits of the case), the company or person who has been ordered to stop participating in the suspected infringement can ask for a review of the injunction. Furthermore, the judge can make the rightholder pay a refundable guarantee which will be forfeit if the case brought is unfounded. In this case, the judge can also order the rightholder to compensate the suspected offender who is found innocent for any loss they have suffered as a result of the injunction * where the Directive allows for various measures following a decision on the merits of a case (e.g. recall, destruction of goods or disposal outside commercial channels), this will not be applied where the offender has acted in good faith (i.e. neither intentionally nor through negligence) and can agree a fair settlement with the rightholder whose rights have been infringed * legal costs are awarded also to the alleged offender, if they are found to be innocent The full text of the proposed Directive is available at: http://www.europa.eu.int/comm/internal_market/en/
IIRC, Please remark that there are already specific consumer protection law preventing abuse of such things, like enforcing the sdale of a specific tire with a chip inside it. Add it with the above and this doesn't seem so horrible as presented in the article summary above.
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
The US may try to match...
actually, it seems that the EU is trying to keep up with the US.
it is beyond dispute (even on this board) that the US is the envy of the world when it comes to technology so it makes sense that the EU - and many other countries - will move in the direction of the US when it comes to writing their own intellectual property laws.
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.
laws like the US DMCA are designed with the intent that the US should maintain this world leadership so it should be no surprise that the rest of the world will follow suit with similar laws of their own.
when north korea becomes the world leader in technology, then the US and ROW can consider the weak IP laws favored by stallman, lessig, perens, and their comrades.
until then, following the lead of the United States of America when it comes to IP would seem to this observer to be the smart thing to do.
All these IP laws won't matter in 5 years. All these laws are SOP's for any civilization in decline.
The gov't and the lawyers in any civilization expand to the very limits of the wealth available, until it is no longer sustainable. We've already passed this "Sustainability Point", as witnessed by shockingly massive budget deficits throughout America, Europe and Japan. These IP laws are the some of the last signs before the bitter economic collapse. In 5 years we'll all be worrying more about food than this nonsense.
For a good "thesis" on all this, read the last 3 books in the Dune series. Herbert warned of such massive expansions. It always ends badly...
The French long ago discovered they couldn't make Corporatism (Fascism dressed in Prada) work in a single country. Hence the EU, a French attempt to make Corporatism work on a single continent.
In the French view of the world, the Government - made up of the French elite, graduates of the ENA - will control the Corporations, and the Corporations will control the consumer.
Europe's one hope is its new Eastern European members, who well-remember German and Russian jackbooted thugs.
Well, that's one hope. The other hope is that the US remains relatively free, so Europeans can make Linus' choice.
668: Neighbour of the Beast
I have to wonder if the people scaremongering have read the Directive.
The "technical device" rule in Article 21 is poorly drafted, but still fairly clear. It criminalises devices designed to circumvent devices which protect "elements which are manifestly identifiable by customers and consumers and which make it easier to recognise the goods as being authentic".
So a machine for manufacturing Microsoft CD holograms would be illegal under the Directive. A machine for making no-brand ink jet cartridges would not.
Those who are saying otherwise haven't read the directive or don't understand it.