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."
All you guys that were going to get out because of DMCA are cancelling your reservations? 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!
These laws are not in stone. They will be changed . You have to let people make backups .
From the article
"Why shouldn't I be allowed to make a copy of a CD I have paid for so I can listen to it on my computer or put it on an MP3 player? This shows that the law can be an ass," said George Gardiner, technology lawyer and partner at law firm Stephenson Harwood.
They can write a book full of laws regarding the illegal usage of one's digital multimedia, but untill some incentive is offered for one not to do things illegally, it will run rampad. As such, I think that the majority in the UK could care less about this. Just think about it, were you on irc today, did you download mp3s of songs you do not own, did you copy a friend's cd, did you even make a full stop at a stop sign while drving or do a rolling stop? 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! I am quite sure that not many even care, and so the companies having their product used illegally need to provide some sort of incentive for those not to copy things and rather buy them..though this is not likely to happen any time soon...
--Shut up and get a mac--
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
Once the US and EU jails are filled with teenagers, society can truly enjoy the New Renaissance. I for will be glad to see the earth cleaned of this scourge that is casual media duplication.
All hail Great Enterprise, Who knows no international boundaries. Thou arst truly the Corporate Ruler in this modern age. Cleanse us of our sins, oh Corporate one. Show us how to become better Consumers! Without Thou we are lost; we canst not thinketh by ourselves. Help us think! Neigh, think for us! Please take our money, and tell us what to do. We are forever in Thy humble service.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.
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.
zWhat would an EWOULDBLOCK block, if an EWOULDBLOCK could block would? -- me
Not that I care; I'm not even British.
I think Gardiner's argument holds perfect ground. You personally may not take advantage of the benefits of digital media, but I use them to the fullest extent possible. All of my CDs are archived in OGG/MP3 for streaming across the network, and possibly burned to CD hundreds at a time for listening to in the car on the MP3/CD player. How can this justifiably be considered illegal? The legal system doesn't work by banning everything that could lead to a crime (until now?).
If they simply stopped buying instead of illegally copying we wouldn't have this mess.
So the illegal file sharing of music has countered the market correction expected by the music industries reported losses? How does that work? A few high profile suits against college kids doesn't even begin to recoup for the losses they are claiming.
1. They've allowed temporary copies (Section 8) - so "transients" created say while listening to the music aren't infringing :-)
2. They've allowed "timeshifting" for domestic premises. Interestingly this opens a whole can of worms for them given the phrasing. A copy can be made for the purposes of timeshifting as long as it does not become an infringeing copy - i.e. one that is sold or let for hire. This would seem to allow at least the creation of "backup" copies for personal use.
3. Section 15 - Observing Studying and Testing of Computer Programs. They've allowed this - as long as you own a copy - and even better this Copyright Act overrules any restrictive license imposed by the copyright holder. (2) Where an act is permitted under this section, it is irrelevant whether or not there exists any term or condition in an agreement which purports to prohibit or restrict the act (such terms being, by virtue of section 296A, void).".
Of course the really stupid part of this is that any infringement is a criminal offense (why?) and you can potentially end up spending longer in jail than a burglar or rapist.
flossie
Write now. Defend liberty
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?
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
No it does not, not directly at least. There is no provision in the law that prohibits you from making copies for personal use.
However, it does make it illegal to circumvent copy-protection devices... in a few years, when DRM might becomes commonplace, it could mean that your rights to make copies for personal use are de facto taken away from you.
Over here in Holland, fair-use rights have always been upheld as a right. Not because prevention and prosecution of the making of such copies would be impractical, but because lawmakers deem the ability to make such copies for personal use a right. What I would like to see is legislation that would protect and guarantee this right, rather than take it away by outlawing the circumvention of copy protection devices. How about a law that outlaws a copy protection device or DRM, if such a device would infringe on fair-use rights, making it impossible to make copies for home use?
Unfortunately it will never happen. When corresponding with both left-wing and right-wing representatives in the EU government, I get the distinct feeling that no consideration whatsoever is given to the rights of individuals, when copyrights or piracy are discussed. The current politcal wind seems to fully favor the RIAA and its ilk.
More about the EUCD and the UK implementation.
If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
Which is actually quite amusing, since Sony are still selling their NetMD minidisc walkmans (walkmen?) in the UK. In case you aren't aware of it these devices come with software that allows you to rip CDs or convert mp3s, wma or wav to ATRAC3 to write to minidisc via usb. As far as I have been able to find, there are no warnings in the manual about ripping CDs or writing downloaded mp3s (indeed the manual actually says "You can record audio data to your computer from sources such as audio CDs and the Internet... You can transfer audio data stored in your computer to an MD").
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.
according to this site. (Google is your friend).
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!
The parent wasn't insightful, it was wishful thinking. Copyright law in the UK has never allowed people the automatic right to make back-ups. Everybody does, and no-one's stupid enough to sue them for it, but technically it's only legal if the licence agreement allows for it.
How exactly were you proposing that this law would be challenged? We have no written Constitution, in the sense that the US does, so the usual mechanism for overturning silly laws across the pond is out. There's nothing inherently wrong with this law in a legal sense: what it says sucks, but it was passed by the usual means. Sure, we can hope that in time copyright law in the UK will be changed to reflect common sense (in particular, explicitly recognising various fair uses in the sense that US copyright law does) but for now, there's simply no basis in law to challenge this.
OTOH, the tinfoil hat brigade who are chanting "super-DMCA" should go and read what it actually says (and doesn't say) before getting all spooky on us.
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.