Slashdot Mirror


UK Becomes Sixth Country to Implement EUCD

orbital3 writes "The UK, as of October 31, 2003, became the sixth nation to implement the laws required to comply with the European Union Copyright Directive with its Copyright and Related Rights Regulations 2003 legislation. This is a short little article about it and here is a copy of the law itself."

21 of 479 comments (clear)

  1. Oh great. Now I'm a criminal by troon · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I have many of my CDs ripped onto my hard drive for playing on my HTPC setup. I own the original CD for every single file, and never have a situation where the same file is used on more than one system simultaneously, and yet I'm all of a sudden a criminal. Thanks guys.

    --
    Ydco co ,df C erb-y go. a Ekrpat t.fxrapev
  2. I expected the UK to pass this... by kcbrown · · Score: 5, Interesting
    The UK, after all, is the nation which decided to pass a law requiring you to hand over your encryption keys without due process when asked, upon penalty of jail when you fail to do so -- and it doesn't matter if you actually have the encryption keys or not.

    It's also the nation that puts up monitoring cameras in many public areas.

    Oh, and it's also the nation that supports the U.S. no matter what, especially when it comes to invading another country in pursuit of "weapons of mass destruction" (wink, wink, nudge, nudge, *cough*oil*cough*).

    The U.K. seems about as close to an Orwellian society as any "enlightened" country on the planet.

    No, the real question is whether or not most of the other members of the EU will pass the EUCD. I expect they will, because they're all in the pockets of large corporations these days. Because money and control, after all, are the only things that matter these days, and nobody gives a flying fuck about liberty, freedom, rights, or the general well-being of the population anymore.

    Cherish what few freedoms you have left. You won't have them for long.

    --
    Use 'slashdot stuff' in the subject line in any email you send me if you want to get past the spam filter.
    1. Re:I expected the UK to pass this... by nicky_d · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The U.K. seems about as close to an Orwellian society as any "enlightened" country on the planet.

      That's right, and it's all thanks to our right-wing "left-wing" government. And even if the people protest, it'll do no use - witness the recent war protests, or consider these excerpts from the Home Office report on ID card consultation, courtest of stand.org.uk:

      What was learned from the consultation exercise? 11. Individual responses, sample surveys, and polling results have demonstrated substantial support for an identity card. Of the 5,000 people and organisations who responded formally to the consultation, 4,200 expressed a view. Over 60% of these were in favour. We also received over 5,000 e-mails from an organised opposition campaign. Over 96% of these were opposed.
      12. We commissioned wider research which involved both focus groups and polling which confirmed, as independent polling has done, 80% of the general public were in favour of identity cards...

      In essence, theyd've carried on commissioning research until it said what they wanted it to say, spinning any existing results in the meantime.

      Frankly, nothing they say or do or agree to is going to surprise me, or a lot of other people. But because these activities aren't yet hitting people directly in the pocket, we won't see civil unrest on a scale of, say, the Poll Tax protests - people readily notice a few pounds a week being taken from them; a few freedoms here and there are perhaps harder to detect...

      Well, perhaps a more civilised country will invade and liberate us. Don't worry, we're flabby and apathetic - the Brits you know from black and white war films are all long dead.

  3. EUCD made DVD reselling illegal in Denmark by zonix · · Score: 4, Interesting

    FYI, here in Denmark the interpretation of the EUCD has made DVD reselling illegal! That is all DVDs other than region 2.

    It pretty much sucks, as you have to privately import, say region 1 and region 4 discs now if you still want to absorb some kind of foreign culture and art.

    z
    --
    What would an EWOULDBLOCK block, if an EWOULDBLOCK could block would? -- me
    1. Re:EUCD made DVD reselling illegal in Denmark by Pofy · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I might missunderstand the situation in Denmark, but I believe a similar situation might occur in Sweden with its propsed changed copyright law. The issue here would be the right to distribute copies. In general, that right belongs to the copyright holder. However, that right is also generally consumed as soon as a copy is sold. That mean, that the right to distribute a specific copy does no longer belog to the copyright holder after they have sold it.

      Now, the consumtion of this right can be global or regional (or whatever the law says). The proposal for the new copyright law in Sweden changes the consumtion from golbal (world wide) to regional (within EU). That is, only a copy sold within EU will have the right of the copyright holder consumed. Thus, any copy sold OUSIDE of EU, will still have the copyright holder as the only one with permision to distribute it (which include resell it and so on).

      Since it is doubtfull they will ever sell DVDs in Europe with a region coding not being the one for Europe, the end effect is that you can't resell DVDs with other region codings inside EU since the copyright holder will retain that right.

      Not sure if that is the case for Denmark mentioned here though.

  4. Re:So I guess... by kcbrown · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Don't worry, the US won't let a bunch of Brits top us. They'll build a super-DMCA? We'll build a Super- DOOPER-DMCA!

    People may laugh at this. They forget that it's exactly this sort of reasoning (modified to sound more palatable to the masses) that was used to justify the last copyright term extension act.

    In other words, don't laugh. It's a lot more likely to happen than you might think.

    --
    Use 'slashdot stuff' in the subject line in any email you send me if you want to get past the spam filter.
  5. Re:Does This Mean Anyone Cares? by kcbrown · · Score: 5, Interesting
    If we got penalized for every little things that humans do wrong, the only jobs would be working at a prison, on either side of the bars!

    Ah, but you haven't been reading the Evil Overlord manual.

    The purpose of legislation such as this isn't to put everyone in prison, it's to make it possible to put anyone in prison -- whomever the government wishes, in other words. That way governments don't have to worry about pesky things like public dissent: they can just arrest the key players before they have a chance to make a mess of things.

    Classic police state stuff.

    --
    Use 'slashdot stuff' in the subject line in any email you send me if you want to get past the spam filter.
  6. Depressed Pride by Apple+Acolyte · · Score: 3, Interesting
    From referenced article

    Indivuals [sic] who make a copy of a copyrighted DVD, CD or music file, whether for back-up or for use on another device such as an MP3 player, are committing a crime.

    And here we all thought the DMCA was the state of the art in draconian intellectual property legislation. Amazingly, while the US Constitution stands eviscerated, America remains the sweet land of liberty in comparison to the rest of the world. Is it possible to feel patriotic and disenchanted at the very same time?

    --
    Part of the hardcore faithful who believed in Apple long before it was cool again to do so
  7. I've read the law. by Kickasso · · Score: 5, Interesting
    And beat me up with a 2x4, I cannot find anything in it that makes copying of your own media for your own use illegal. Moreover, I cannot find anything that makes DeCSS illegal. Can anyone point it out for me?

    Not that I care; I'm not even British.

    1. Re:I've read the law. by Doctor7 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      There is nothing specifically in there about preventing the public shifting media for personal use. Bear in mind that there is no fair use exception in English law, so it has technically always been illegal. This EUCD implementation just makes prosecution more likely.

  8. just a thought by narkotix · · Score: 3, Interesting

    what if we encrypted the songs with a key. A website held all the keys (which arent illegal to host). Now technically if any organisation (RIAA,ARIA etc etc) broke the encryption then they will be of their own act right? If they download the key and decrypt it...they will also be guilty of the crime..
    maybe someone can implement this idea!?! or maybe im just smoking too much crack rofl

    --
    We played dungeons and dragons for 3 hours.....then i was slain by an elf
  9. It is not illegal to make personal backups by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Article 6 of the EUCD is quite clear. What is illegal is to circumvent any copy protection technology for any purposes whatever. But if the material is not copy protected, and the vast existing stock of CD's are not, then it is legal to make a digital copy for personal use (as well as all kinds of fairuse, educational and club uses)provided that you own the original.

  10. Digital media laws by vanillaspice · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I don't really feel it benefits anyone for me to reiterate this for each and every post about digital rights, but this seems like a decent one to use my umbrella statement.

    To all media distribution companies, big and small: You decided to go digital. Deal with it.

    It is not your right to bend legislation at any level to secure your profit margin because that's not free trade. Go ahead and use any copy protection schemes you wish. But don't you even dare try to legally sanction somebody because they've figured out how to get around it: they've just acted more intelligently and more efficiently.

    If you truly believed in free trade and the spirit of competition, you'd try to maximize quality while minimizing overhead. What causes so much overhead? Executive salaries and expense accounts, as well as advertising and payola. You've over-saturated your markets with expensive and inferior product, and people have gotten wise to you. The only companies who have any right to complain are the small independents, because the playing field isn't level to begin with.

    This was the case with video games piracy and the resultant bankruptcies of production houses during the 1980s and 1990s. If only their distribution companies would have given more back to the people who originated these products instead of fattening their wallets, we might still have diversity in our software.

    Creative people have a right to their intellectual property. Why not show them some respect by divvying up the rewards for their efforts more fairly?

  11. Re:Translation by maxpublic · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This is really getting old. One reason there is a backlash from companies against "fair use" is because people decided to abuse it.

    And the apologia for corporate usurpation of individual rights continues. "Hey, if everyone wasn't a criminal none of these laws would be passed" has got to be the one of the most naive arguments ever made.

    Fact is, if everyone is breaking a law then something is wrong with the law. The idea that people obey laws only out of fear of punishment is the argument of the dictator and his adoring fans, who use this as an excuse to drop-kick anyone who happens to disagree with them or refuse to play ball. It should be rather clear by now that the 20th century business model employed by the rabid and frantic RIAA/MPAA doesn't cut it in the 21st century, but rather than try to develop a new business model they buy off politicians to pass laws in an effort to shore up their eroding economic monoliths.

    And why not? There are plenty of Joe Idiots sitting about just waiting to kiss ass and jump on the bandwagon, supporting any legal inanity proposed by these modern-day rail barons just so, for a few brief seconds, they can feel morally superior to their neighbors.

    My only question is: where the hell were all you losers when the buggy whip industry was demanding that the automobile be banned? If you'd gotten off your lazy asses then we could've saved those poor oppressed corporations and done away with the evil automobile forever!

    Max

    --
    My god carries a hammer. Your god died nailed to a tree. Any questions?
  12. Meet your MP by Brian+Blessed · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I went to see my MP (Member of Parliament) about this and explained to him that because it was similar to the DMCA which the US has had for 5 years, we could expect it to have the same unintended consequences.

    A few days later I received a letter from him saying that he was asking questions of the Government's Department of Trade and Industry, and would get back to me with their responses.

    Have others here tried this course of action? / Is there a coordinated effort out there?

    What can be done after this?

    - Brian

  13. This will probably be scrapped... by JackJudge · · Score: 3, Interesting

    ...at least in part as being unenforceable.
    Several years ago the Home Office introduced a law banning VCR owners from keeping off-air recordings for more than 30 days.
    The police declared it unenforceable and the govt. had to back down.
    Now I don't know about you but I think the police have got more important things to do than checking to see if Kylie's latest warblings are on little Johnny Smith's MP3 player.

  14. Re:In short by x-router · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Interesting: So in fact sony are selling a device that has software to encourage you to break law. In fact they are selling this device thats sole purpose is to copy CD's something that is now illegal even if you own the original.

    Perhaps a test case against sony would force some sense to be seen in such matters. After all sony seem to like to take PSX mod chip makers to court for doing exactly what they are.

  15. Implementing the same law in different times... by Rozzo · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I just want to focus on the timeline of EUCD implementation over European countries. Delaying the implementation among each country keeps the number of oppositors against it divided (and thus weakened), just those of one nation each time. They would have faced a different (and more consistent) opposition to EUCD if they had set it on in all countries at the same time. Obviously they did ponder it and act consequently. In Italy where it has been implemented on 29 April 2003, street prices raised a new level as a consequence of the EUCD act, yet original CDroms, DVD, book and other intellectual material are still remaining at untolerable high prices. This seems to me a confirmation that EUCD is only helping great companies to earn even more, without giving anything better (in price or quality) to the public. Sadly.

    --
    Do or do not. There is no Fry.(Bender after vaporizing Fry)
  16. What you have to remember by ajs318 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    is that, traditionally at least, laws in the UK have never counted for much. Bad laws get broken all the time - but only criminals and minor traffic offenders get punished. If the politicians want to make stupid laws, it's easier just to let them - and then go ahead and carry on doing what we used to do anyway. The police have a hard enough job dealing with real crimes that they haven't time to waste on trendy new crimes. I guess it comes from the same thinking that gave us the class system: there are Law Abiding Citizens {who like to remenisce about the old days when you could leave your front door unlocked} and there are Criminals {who shoplift, litter, vandalise property &c}. Even amongst Criminals, there are Good Criminals {stealing from the rich without hurting anyone} and Bad Criminals {stealing from the poor, violence, sex offences &c}. Merely re-branding something that Law Abiding Citizens do as a crime will not turn L.A.C.s into Criminals.

    If the police don't actually want you for something, you're fine. What this law - or any new law passed since the infamous Criminal Justice Bill of '94 - actually means is that if they do want you for something, they will have an easier time pinning something on you. For instance, it's a common trick for the police to pick you up on a charge unrelated to your normal activities in order to be able to search your home without a warrant. This is usually a little easier than getting an actual warrant, but any evidence it turns up will be admissible in a court of law. Conversely, if a sufficiently high-ranking officer requests that the ordinary plods turn a blind eye to a particular activity, and they do, then the only thing the government could do would be to place the area under martial law - which would be political suicide and to the best of my knowledge has never happened outside N.I.

    It's technically already against the law in the UK to make a copy of a CD or LP you own onto cassette in order to listen to it in your car. But I'll dare bet you what you like if you went through a copper's car, or even a government minister's car, you'd find something taped at home; and to the best of my knowledge nobody has ever been sent down for that. Nor are they likely ever to start.

    Those at the top have lost the plot and the rest of us - who do all the real donkey work - just have to put on a bit of a show for them. It's a grossly inefficient system, and it carries with it the possibility of misuse; but as long as it works, it gets left as it is because any attempt to change it would probably make things worse.

    --
    Je fume. Tu fumes. Nous fûmes!
    1. Re:What you have to remember by TSage · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Am I the only one who finds this reasoning foolish and naive? And I do not mean the poster is foolish (you actually seem upset that it is not different).

      There should never be a situation where foolish laws are passed because "only the criminals will be punished." Well, think about this: one day what is considered a criminal may change. Look at the hackers who find bugs in systems and report them to companies only to find themselves in trouble with the law. Notice how I used hackers, remember when that had a different connotation?

      And aside from the potential martial law crack downs wherein everyone breaks the law at anytime, what about the rights of criminals? Are they not people? If we have to catch someone who committed a more devious crime by almost baiting them with laws, who can honestly say that that is just?

      The poster mentioned that there was a potential for abuse, but "as long as it works" no one wants to deal with it. I'm sorry, but it doesn't "work". It is just people don't care because it doesn't affect them which is not the same thing as working. People don't care that minor drug users are thrown in jail where they are raped and psychologically tortured because they're obviously the scum of the Earth. "They should have thought more before breaking the law." Yeah, well since when do we turn a blind eye to rape?

      Sorry, I've gotten a bit off topic, but this bothers me. People should not be lackadaisical about the justice system and the legislation that criminalizes people. We should be making sure that justice is served, not that only people who break laws are thrown in deplorable jails.


      TSage

  17. Re:In short by gnu-generation-one · · Score: 3, Interesting

    "It's basically a super DMCA act. It kills your right to make personal backups and prohibits copyright circumvention of any kind. How nice of them."

    The article also mentions that the use of iPods, Nomads, and other MP3 players will become impractical, as it would be illegal to convert your CDs into suitable formats.

    As someone about to buy such a device, I'm going to have to ask the manufacturers, and possibly an MP or two for advice, as the last thing we want is a $400 device being confiscated for holding a copy of the music I purchased at full retail price.

    I presume that Apple, Creative, Dell, and other manufacturers are writing to the government to enquire whether they mean to deprive UK customers of these products? And no "the Europeans told us to do it" doesn't count as an excuse.