Slashdot Mirror


German Publishers Want Monopoly On Sentences

Glyn Moody writes "You think copyright can't get any more draconian? Think again. In Germany, newspaper publishers are lobbying for 'a new exclusive right conferring the power to monopolize speech e.g. by assigning a right to re-use a particular wording in the headline of a news article anywhere else without the permission of the rights holder. According to the drafts circulating on the Internet, permission shall be obtainable exclusively by closing an agreement with a new collecting society which will be founded after the drafts have matured into law. Depending on the particulars, new levies might come up for each and every user of a PC, at least if the computer is used in a company for commercial purposes.' Think that will never work because someone will always break the news cartel? Don't worry, they've got that covered too. They want to 'amend cartel law in order to enable a global "pooling" of all exclusive rights of all newspaper publishers in Germany in order to block any attempt to defect from the paywall cartel by a single competitor.' And rest assured, if anything like this passes in Germany, publishers everywhere will be using the copyright ratchet to obtain 'parity.'"

158 comments

  1. So what by binarylarry · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Dying creatures thrash about as they go to meet their doom.

    News at 11 (please don't sue me gemany)

    --
    Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
    1. Re:So what by WrongSizeGlass · · Score: 1

      Here's one they can 'monopolize': German Publishers Can Kiss My Shiny Metal Ass!

    2. Re:So what by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Dying creatures thrash about as they go to meet their doom.

      "There has grown up in the minds of certain groups in this country the notion that because a man or corporation has made a profit out of the public for a number of years, the government and the courts are charged with the duty of guaranteeing such profit in the future, even in the face of changing circumstances and contrary to the public interest. This strange doctrine is not supported by statute nor common law. Neither individuals nor corporations have any right to come into court and ask that the clock of history be stopped, or turned back."
      -Life-Line by Robert A. Heinlein (1939)

      /Anonymously because I don't need the karma.

    3. Re:So what by mikael_j · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The problem is that in general laws don't get removed once they're in place. This means that if these guys get a whole bunch of insane laws on the books before they die off the laws will almost certainly hang around for decades to come.

      --
      Greylisting is to SMTP as NAT is to IPv4
    4. Re:So what by Sponge+Bath · · Score: 1

      Thrashing creatures can do a lot of damage, best to take action and put them down quick.

    5. Re:So what by Ginger+Unicorn · · Score: 3, Funny

      /Anonymously because I don't need the karma.

      You arrogant presumptuous cunt.

      --
      (1.21 gigawatts) / (88 miles per hour) = 30 757 874 newtons
    6. Re:So what by Ginger+Unicorn · · Score: 5, Funny

      sigh, sorry my stupid little brother saw i was still logged in and decided to insult people using my account

      --
      (1.21 gigawatts) / (88 miles per hour) = 30 757 874 newtons
    7. Re:So what by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Rather like the Battle of the Bulge? /Didn't mean to mention the war.

    8. Re:So what by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You sure it wasn't the cat or dog walking on the keyboard? Or maybe the will of god or a random bitflipping incident by cosmic rays?

    9. Re:So what by NeutronCowboy · · Score: 1

      It matters when the dying creatures are 50 ton dinosaurs having their death-throes in your living room - and the ability to vote. The only solution is eternal vigilance and nipping these proposals in the bud.

      --
      Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
    10. Re:So what by BrokenHalo · · Score: 1

      sigh, sorry my stupid little brother saw i was still logged in and decided to insult people using my account

      OK - I was just about to call you an arrogant, presumptuous cunt. :-D

    11. Re:So what by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hitler was hired by the zionists.. he was only a cog

    12. Re:So what by SteveFoerster · · Score: 1

      Fear not! You can still call his brother that.

      --
      Space game using normal deck of cards: http://BattleCards.org
    13. Re:So what by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      His word usage: presumtuous, arrogant. Your word usage: stupid, little. He wins.

    14. Re:So what by DaveGod · · Score: 1

      sigh, sorry my stupid little brother saw i was still logged in and decided to insult people using my account

      Nice to see siblings giving credit where it's due; I suspect most people would consider it a blunt but fair assessment of the typical Slashdot comment (counting my own).

      Not from Glasgow by any chance? He'd fit right in.

    15. Re:So what by Hurricane78 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      So that is how you in not only a +5 Informative, but also a +5 Funny? By insulting people and then taking it back?

      Wait, I can do that too:

      YOU ALL SUCK DICK

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
    16. Re:So what by Hurricane78 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Err...Sorry for that typo. I meant to say “Your comment was insightful and funny, and I would like to subscribe to your newsletter.”
      The keys are like right next to each other...

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
    17. Re:So what by BoberFett · · Score: 1

      Decades? Wow, Germans are lucky. Here in the US we get saddled with bad laws for centuries.

    18. Re:So what by lyyeagle · · Score: 1

      More and more creatrures are extincting. http://www.scaffoldingcn.com/

    19. Re:So what by pugugly · · Score: 1

      Right till he used cunt. He lost.

      --
      An Invisible Entity of Vast Power whose existence must be taken on faith alone: Liberal Media
  2. Wow by CasualFriday · · Score: 3, Funny

    "German Publishers Want Monopoly On Sentences" I'm posting this now before /. can sue me for it.

    --
    Raters gon' rate.
  3. Second Renaissance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's coming and big corporations are not part of it.

    1. Re:Second Renaissance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Which will come first, this "Second Renaissance" or the year of Linux on the desktop?

    2. Re:Second Renaissance by WrongSizeGlass · · Score: 4, Funny

      Which will come first, this "Second Renaissance" or the year of Linux on the desktop?

      Halley's Comet

    3. Re:Second Renaissance by aquila.solo · · Score: 1

      Neither: DNF

    4. Re:Second Renaissance by Hurricane78 · · Score: 1

      From experience, the only thing that is missing for the year of Linux on the Desktop, is webcam (audio/video) support for instant messengers in MSN/WLM and Yahoo.
      Everything else is “for idiots” already, according to a Jane Random that I recommended Ubuntu to. (So if you make it any simpler, it will become worse!)

      Basically this is a complete list of what the average user requires:
      - File management (done)
      - Play audio/video (Linux is very good at this)
      - E-Mail & calendaring (e.g. Evolution or Thunderbird with Lightning)
      - Instant messaging with audio, video, and those stupid animated smilies and things like that, at minimum for MSN, Yahoo and ICQ (here it looks pretty bleak, as some work sometimes, but there is nothing that can do it all. Also it is hard to get working.)
      - Create documents (OpenOffice, still having the old MS-Office-like interface, already beats MS Office in this!!)
      - Surf the web, including YouTube and Flash games! [Yes. Flash is imperative and non-negotiable to them.] (Done. Works well, lots of choice.)
      - Their hardware needs to work. (Already very good, pretty close to perfect. Rare cases of non-working are caused by evil or cheap/lazy hardware companies. Which will end as soon as Linux gains enough market share. Which it can do with the current hardware support.)

      For all this points it is important, that their own favorite features, no matter how minute and irrelevant they seem, are implemented. Luckily, this also is already mostly done.

      So we’re really close, the distance is measurable, and the very few remaining problems are fixable. (E.g. Pidgin 3.0 is supposed to have video/audio support. And Kopete already does it for everything but MSN, where it will soon work [again?].)

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
  4. Heck, why not words by markov_chain · · Score: 4, Funny

    Knowing how German works there is clearly lots of room for creativity in word construction (or is that Wortbildungkreativität?) :D

    --
    Tsunami -- You can't bring a good wave down!
    1. Re:Heck, why not words by BrokenHalo · · Score: 1

      They can have this one free, gratis and for nothing:

      Phrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrblt!

    2. Re:Heck, why not words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That would be Wortbildungskreativität. But you were very close :D

      The "s" is important because you imply that it is the creativity of the "construction of the word" or v.v.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_grammar#Cases
      "Genitive (Wessen?): The possessor of something, or the object of certain other prepositions."

      Greetings from the dark side

    3. Re:Heck, why not words by Hurricane78 · · Score: 1

      Well yes. But you still lose freedom and clarity.
      Consider your comment. I now use German grammar and English words to say the same:
      Germanworkknowing, the wordconstructioncreativityroomamountsize is clear. :D
      Note that this is also not normal German, and that you can cut any of the words is those large words out, and place them separately.

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
    4. Re:Heck, why not words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wortbildungskreativität - you missed one binding s. But yes, that's absolutely possible. :-)

    5. Re:Heck, why not words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well yes. But you still lose freedom and clarity.

      Er, no. Well, I wouldn't say you'd gain freedom and clarity by using German grammar rules. More correctly: I wouldn't say you'd gain freedom and clarity by using German grammar rules. But for German language, they are indispensable.

      Note that this is also not normal German, and that you can cut any of the words is those large words out, and place them separately.

      Sorry, I don't get what you want to try to communicate. ;)

      Concerning the long composed German words:

      "Wortbildung" and "Wort Bildung" mean two different things (using the given context): The first means "the creation of words", the latter "the word 'creation'". Therefore, the composita make things rather clear, because "Wortbildung" is as unambiguous as language can be.

      As German is not English, comparing the clarity of these languages is a meaningless endeavor. They work differently and they have different needs.

      That said, I think it is easier to be ambiguous in English (in creative terms), while it is easier to write pure nonsense in German if you don't follow the rules. That's the problem: There is a growing tendency to use English-like grammar in German, thereby eliminating any meaning from the sentences. It is horrible how often you are not able to catch the thoughts of otherwise intelligent people because they've simply lost their ability to express themselves in written German.

    6. Re:Heck, why not words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The "s" is important because you imply that it is the creativity of the "construction of the word" or v.v.

      You are right with the "s", but for the wrong reason. It's an epenthesis (Fugen-s). The genitive form would not make much sense, because "Wortbildungskreativität" it is the creativity (of some person) to construct new words, not the creativity of the construction itself.

  5. Sheesh... by DoofusOfDeath · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    What a bunch of Nazis.

    1. Re:Sheesh... by camperdave · · Score: 1

      What a bunch of Nazis.

      Well, that didn't take very long.

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    2. Re:Sheesh... by TouchAndGo · · Score: 1

      How is that offtopic?!

    3. Re:Sheesh... by DoofusOfDeath · · Score: 1

      Thanks, I was going for a /. record.

    4. Re:Sheesh... by camperdave · · Score: 1

      Thanks, I was going for a /. record.

      What are you trying to do? Start a "First Godwin" meme?

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    5. Re:Sheesh... by Zantac69 · · Score: 1

      Wonder how many would like to have THAT in their achievement's list.

      --
      1331461 is only semiprime *sigh* Alas - I am just short of 1337.
    6. Re:Sheesh... by Mikkeles · · Score: 1

      Oh! God!; Fr1st Niaz posts!

      --
      Great minds think alike; fools seldom differ.
    7. Re:Sheesh... by Hurricane78 · · Score: 1

      Considering how we already had stories where TFS contained a Nazi reference right after the quote from TFA, I say you already lost that one. ;)
      To beat that, you would have to either start with one, or just Godwin the thing right at the start of the headline.

      So to anyone out there: If you manage to get a story on the front page, that starts with “Nazi...”, you win! ;)

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
    8. Re:Sheesh... by DoofusOfDeath · · Score: 1

      You, gentlemen, are brilliant.

  6. Germany can still easily... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    disagree with the proposal. If no one else, the pirate party member in the German parliament will surely be a critical voice...

    1. Re:Germany can still easily... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      there is no pirate party member in the german parliament.

      there was one, a former member of the SPD (that's how he got his seat), but after the elections in september 2009 the pirate party didn't get a new seat

  7. Re:Go away, Baby Boomers. by king+neckbeard · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    I don't think Germany had the baby boom, and not many people would consider the Nazis the greatest generation

    --
    This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
  8. They did it with software so why not words? by Joce640k · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I really, really hope they do this.

    Of course the consequences will be awful but at least the anti-software patent people will have a perfect analogy for their arguments and one that the public (and politicians) can understand.

    --
    No sig today...
    1. Re:They did it with software so why not words? by WrongSizeGlass · · Score: 1

      Are you saying that I'll be able to pay for and 'license' a copy of a German newspaper but never 'own' it?

    2. Re:They did it with software so why not words? by BenoitGirard · · Score: 1

      Yeah! If they keep at it, I can see a massive backlash on the horizon. "Enough is enough with these so called rights! From now on, we use information freely like God intended and that's that!"

    3. Re:They did it with software so why not words? by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      Of course the consequences will be awful but at least the anti-software patent people will have a perfect analogy for their arguments and one that the public (and politicians) can understand.

      I think the "public" can understand it perfectly well already, but they're too busy trying to scratch out a living in a world where corporations are siphoning off an increasing amount of wealth for the economic elite.

      Me, I'm waiting for the Intellectual Property War. Right now it's only a skirmish, but I expect increased guerrilla activity in days ahead. Actually, "Intellectual Property Revolution" is probably more like it. You can have my right to fair use when you wrest it from my cold dead hands.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    4. Re:They did it with software so why not words? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      The lawyers would love it. Hell, they already do. It's a license to print money.

      Unless we do something to encourage lawyers from doing so, that is. Would be shame if something happened to them; and all that. With today's corruption and blatant disregard for citizens in politics, this seems to turn into the only way left for the people.

    5. Re:They did it with software so why not words? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh my god, how perfect was that? CAPTCHA for the above post was "massacre".

    6. Re:They did it with software so why not words? by Scrameustache · · Score: 2, Funny

      the anti-software patent people will have a perfect analogy for their arguments

      But they won't be allowed to use it in print, because it will be copyrighted.

      --

      You can't take the sky from me...

  9. A rainbow table of "Headlines"? by walmass · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I wonder what the definition of "newspaper" will be for the purpose of this law--will it be dead-tree only? Otherwise someone should generate all possible combination of words resulting in (perhaps nonsense) sentences of lets say 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5 words, and then of course protect them with this law.

    Once the list is generated, the now idle servers can be stuffed up the ass of the greedy bastards who want this law.

    1. Re:A rainbow table of "Headlines"? by sanosuke001 · · Score: 1

      That is the best idea I've ever heard.

      The only problem is that your rainbow tables will undoubtedly infringe on the already in print newspapers. You'll have to be VERY careful not to include any already created headlines.

      --
      -SaNo
    2. Re:A rainbow table of "Headlines"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      They're specifically looking to monopolize the wordings in online "newspapers", while at the same time trying hard not to extend the scope to anything but their own publications. It's aimed at Google et al. I for one hope that Google will not license the snippets and headlines but instead remove all German newspaper URLs from the index.

    3. Re:A rainbow table of "Headlines"? by king+neckbeard · · Score: 1

      We could get to work on it now and get grandfathered in, at least, assuming that existing headlines are protected against future infringement but aren't subject to retroactive lawsuits.

      --
      This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    4. Re:A rainbow table of "Headlines"? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      I for one hope that Google will not license the snippets and headlines but instead remove all German newspaper URLs from the index.

      They don't have to do that either. All they have to do is paraphrase them. Surely Google, with their language tools, can do this in an automated fashion? I see why you would want them to select the nuclear option but I think this way makes more sense.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    5. Re:A rainbow table of "Headlines"? by king+neckbeard · · Score: 1

      The problem is that by paraphrasing they risk infringing on another newspaper that has similar language. Canning german newspapers would probably be simpler to implement, and would make the newspapers realize their folly faster.

      --
      This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    6. Re:A rainbow table of "Headlines"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They don't have to do that either. All they have to do is paraphrase them. Surely Google, with their language tools, can do this in an automated fashion?

      And anyone who doesn't have the same resources that Google has does what?

    7. Re:A rainbow table of "Headlines"? by netsharc · · Score: 1

      Surely Google has some sort of tool to see if another page/site contains some word...

      Adding adjectives would be interesting, "BP to plug oil leak" will then become "Bastards BP to plug fucking oil leak".

      --
      What time is it/will be over there? Check with my iPhone app!
    8. Re:A rainbow table of "Headlines"? by Briareos · · Score: 1

      They don't have to do that either. All they have to do is paraphrase them. Surely Google, with their language tools, can do this in an automated fashion? I see why you would want them to select the nuclear option but I think this way makes more sense.

      Meh... just pipe them through Google Translate(TM) going from English to Pig Latin. Problem solved.

      np: Efdemin - There Will Be Singing (Chicago)

      --

      "I'm not anti-anything, I'm anti-everything, it fits better." - Sole

    9. Re:A rainbow table of "Headlines"? by king+neckbeard · · Score: 1

      They probably can, but it would take effort, and some headlines might be behind a paywall or not online at all. German news is a fairly small market for Google, given that news isn't that big for them, but Google indexing these headlines is very important to getting them more traffic. I do like adding adjectives, though. Maybe they could let you place your own adjectives for a certain party in headlines as a customization option, though.

      --
      This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    10. Re:A rainbow table of "Headlines"? by tebee · · Score: 1

      I see a new business opportunity here - the rise of the Sentence troll !

      --
      N.B. this user is far too lazy to write a witty and intelligent sig.
    11. Re:A rainbow table of "Headlines"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "I wonder what the definition of "newspaper" will be for the purpose of this law--will it be dead-tree only? Otherwise someone should generate all possible combination of words resulting in (perhaps nonsense) sentences of lets say 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5 words, and then of course protect them with this law.

      Once the list is generated, the now idle servers can be stuffed up the ass of the greedy bastards who want this law."

      Pure genius.
      I set up an online "newspaper"
      I set up a random generator to generate all the possible Headline combinations and then display each in turn on my website for 1 second.
      In a matter of days, I will have thousands of headlines no news corporation can use.
      Then when one DOES use one close to mine, I sue them for millions for breaking this idiotic law.
      Then I get the satisfaction of watching the asses who tried to line their own pockets with this law stew in thier own juices as I trot out "But your newspaper supported this law, now your going to have to live with it"

  10. Re:Go away, Baby Boomers. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Most of Europe, Germany included, did indeed have a baby boom after World War II, much like America did. Baby booms are quite common after devastating conflicts, regardless of who "won". It's society's way of making up for the loss of life, and to handle the grief associated with such losses. We've seen it happen throughout history, not just due to war, but due to significant natural disasters, as well.

    And the Nazis weren't the equivalent of America's Greatest Generation. They were from earlier generations. Most of the American leaders at that time weren't part of the Greatest Generation, either, with many of them being born well before 1900.

    The Greatest Generation includes people born after World War I, from 1918 to 1945. These were the people who fought in WWII, but many did so against their will, regardless of nation, as conscripts rather than volunteers. Many disagreed with the stances and actions of their political leaders, but would've faced a bullet in the head were they to resist.

  11. Flip side by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 1

    The flip side, though, is that pro-patent people could also use this to their advantage. Imagine this exchange:

    Anti-patent person: Software patents are ridiculous! It would be like trying to claim ownership over a sentence!
    Pro-patent person: Well, copyrights on sentences have been granted, so there!

    --
    Palm trees and 8
    1. Re:Flip side by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      Anti-patent person: Software patents are ridiculous! It would be like trying to claim ownership over a sentence!
      Pro-patent person: Well, copyrights on sentences have been granted, so there!

      Anti-patent person: Watch how easily I ignore your copyrights! Your copyrights are about as useful and effective as Prohibition or laws against marijuana use. What will you do when more people are breaking your law than obeying it?

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    2. Re:Flip side by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "What will you do when more people are breaking your law than obeying it?"

      The same thing we do with drug prohibition: expand the police force and increase the power that the police have, and then go ahead and incarcerate millions of people.

      --
      Palm trees and 8
    3. Re:Flip side by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >What will you do when more people are breaking your law than obeying it?

      Oh, that's easy. Hire more lawyers.

      "More People Ignoring Copyright Law Than Ever" Headline (c) 2020 Intellectual Property News Network

    4. Re:Flip side by BlueStrat · · Score: 1

      "What will you do when more people are breaking your law than obeying it?"

      The same thing we do with drug prohibition: expand the police force and increase the power that the police have, and then go ahead and incarcerate millions of people

      Well, they DO still have a number of the old concentration camps preserved in Germany. They could just dust them off and light the pilot lights on the old ovens. Solves the overcrowded prison & incarceration costs problems, as well as eliminating recidivism among copyright violators. They could also simply swap-out the swastikas for the "©" symbol and save a ton on flags & signage.

      I keed, I keed!

      But seriously, these dying businesses & business models need to have their ability to buy laws reined in, as their desperate attempts to distort reality are damaging the entire human race.

      Strat

      --
      Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
  12. Sentences? by rossdee · · Score: 1

    I don't speak German or read German newspapers, but from my knowledge of english-language newspapers, Headlines are raely sentences, and often don' make sense..
    Often they are written to be a clever play on words. I suspect tht there is a headline writting class in journalism schools.

    Anyway since headlines are a very short summary of an event, and a lot of events are similar to past events. (eg man drowns in flodded river) I don't think they could be copyrighted.

    1. Re:Sentences? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't think they could be copyrighted.

      Yes, which is why they want to "fix" copyright law.

    2. Re:Sentences? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      There is indeed such a class in Dutch journalism schools. It was optional when I went there though.

    3. Re:Sentences? by canajin56 · · Score: 1

      They can't be copyrighted, that's why they need a new law giving them eternal ownership of them.

      --
      ASCII stupid question, get a stupid ANSI
    4. Re:Sentences? by Bigjeff5 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Indeed, headlines are purported to be facts, and they certainly look like facts (man drowns in river, oil spill to break record, etc). Under pretty much all copyright law in the world facts are not copyrightable. The very idea of it is insane. It's the composition that's copyrightable, not the content. You can't copy someone's article word for word, but you can use that article as a source and say the exact same facts.

      I can't believe newspapers of all people are dumb enough not to see what this could do to them. It's not going to make any kind of effecitve "headline exchange", people will just use different headlines. They'll start adding things like "New York Times says 'Headless Man Runs Nude Through Central Park'" instead of "Headless Man Runs Nude Through Central Park". That would pass muster, because it is a quote: The NYT did indeed say that (if they said it of course).

      --
      Security is mostly a superstition... Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. - Helen Keller
    5. Re:Sentences? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anyway since headlines are a very short summary of an event, and a lot of events are similar to past events. (eg man drowns in flodded river) I don't think they could be copyrighted.

      This proposal sounds like the RIAA hold on music in the US, really. Samples are under copyright so why not copyright the minimal meaningful sequence of words as well? WIAA (Word Industry Association of America) would like to send you a bill as your baby come up with "mommy" as her first words. There's a copyright for that.

  13. Round up the pirates by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 1

    I'm coming to the conclusion that some people have such a sociopathic sense of entitlement that they are unfit for living among humans. Anyone who takes steps to use force of law (which ultimately comes from the barrel of a gun) to steal from society without regard is a dirty pirate and should be dealt with as such.

    --
    Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
    1. Re:Round up the pirates by lgw · · Score: 1

      You do realize you're riffing on Ayn Rand, right? Not saying that's good or bad, but few people realize that was her principle point.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    2. Re:Round up the pirates by Nikker · · Score: 1

      It is funny how that line has apparently become so thin it has almost dissapeared.

      --
      A loop, by its nature, continues. If that didn't make sense, start reading this sentence again.
    3. Re:Round up the pirates by drinkypoo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You do realize you're riffing on Ayn Rand, right? Not saying that's good or bad, but few people realize that was her principle point.

      Even fewer people realize the difference between principle and principal.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    4. Re:Round up the pirates by Bigjeff5 · · Score: 2, Funny

      You do realize you're riffing on Ayn Rand, right? Not saying that's good or bad, but few people realize that was her principle point.

      Maybe because it wasn't? Have you read any of her work? Or do you just get the liberal Cliff's notes?

      She wasn't about stealing from society by force of law, she was about freedom from being coerced into giving to society. They are very different things (though to a socialist, they are identical). What about this law increases the freedom from being coerced into giving to society?

      Frankly, Ayn Rand would be appalled at the proposed German law. It represents the exact opposite of the ideals she supported. In fact, it is very, very similar to the central theme in Atlas Shrugged. In Atlas Shrugged, it was impossible to exist in mainstream society without breaking the law. Her solution was to step out of society completely, and form a new one.

      There was one pirate in the story, but he was characterized as quite a narcissistic asshole (though irresistible to the main character), and most of the people in the reclusive society of "doers" did not approve of his methods. John Galt, the elusive figure around which the story was built, and the ultimate role model pushed forward by Rand, was certainly no pirate. He did preach too much, in my opinion, when given the opportunity. That part of the book sucked.

      --
      Security is mostly a superstition... Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. - Helen Keller
    5. Re:Round up the pirates by cduffy · · Score: 1

      You completely failed to grok the parent's point -- which was that this law is completely in-line with the kind of behavior Ayn Rand was against, and for essentially the same reasons.

      Sheesh.

    6. Re:Round up the pirates by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 1

      Maybe because it wasn't? Have you read any of her work? Or do you just get the liberal Cliff's notes?

      That might be an idiom you're not familiar with. Replace "riffing on" with "making variations on" and I think you'll get the gist of what he meant.

      --
      Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
    7. Re:Round up the pirates by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't scare the Randroid with your non-literal interpretation of reality - don't you know that the facts have a liberal bias? :)

    8. Re:Round up the pirates by colinrichardday · · Score: 1

      There was one pirate in the story, but he was characterized as quite a narcissistic asshole (though irresistible to the main character), and most of the people in the reclusive society of "doers" did not approve of his methods.

      I never thought of Ragnar Danneskjöld as a narcissistic asshole. Their disapproval of his methods has more to do with his safety than the injuries he might inflict on others.

  14. Cease and desist letter, Parker Brothers by noidentity · · Score: 5, Funny

    This is to inform you that the headline

    "German Publishers Want Monopoly On Sentences"

    infringes on our trademark, Monopoly. Please refrain from using this word in your headlines, or contact us for licensing arrangements. Further use will result in legal action.

    1. Re:Cease and desist letter, Parker Brothers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You just infringed on Slashdot's copyright to the headline.

    2. Re:Cease and desist letter, Parker Brothers by Asaf.Zamir · · Score: 1

      This is to inform you that the word "German", belongs to us. Please refrain from using this word. Celtic tribes.

    3. Re:Cease and desist letter, Parker Brothers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please refrain from using the phrase "German Publishers Want Monopoly On Sentences". We are the only ones who have dibs on that (well, outside of large coorporations ofcourse).

      Signed, The Law.

  15. Arbeit macht frei by Vinegar+Joe · · Score: 1, Insightful

    The Germans can have the right to that particular "word order".....

    --
    "The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old......They literally know nothing." - Ben Rhodes
    1. Re:Arbeit macht frei by jeti · · Score: 1

      Freiheit macht Arbeit

    2. Re:Arbeit macht frei by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      For those who are not familiar with this sentence:

      "Arbeit macht frei", which literally translates to "work makes free" was an inscription at the entrances of several concentration camps during the Third Reich.

      It is beyond me, why the parent uses this particular sentence. May I remind everybody that more than 7 million people died in these camps.

      You do not make such a reference in a discussion on copyright. Get some human decency!

    3. Re:Arbeit macht frei by colinrichardday · · Score: 1

      Get some human decency!

      Do you expect human decency on Slashdot?

    4. Re:Arbeit macht frei by Amanieu · · Score: 1

      Get some human decency!

      Do you expect human decency on Slashdot?

      Do you expect humans on Slashdot?

    5. Re:Arbeit macht frei by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      more than 7 million

      A decade later, an extra million added. You sure know how this works, but you'll have to wait until next year for that number.

  16. We need to put a stop to this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    I suggest a "period."

  17. "Informative" by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    To whoever modded this post "informative:" it was obviously a joke. Either mod it "funny" or mod it "lame" (yes, I propose that we add "-1 Lame" to the moderation system).

    --
    Palm trees and 8
    1. Re:"Informative" by lgw · · Score: 2, Funny

      This is Slashdot. "-1 Lame" is implied on all posts. We just moved the zero-point to compensate.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    2. Re:"Informative" by stephanruby · · Score: 1

      To whoever modded this post "informative:" it was obviously a joke. Either mod it "funny" or mod it "lame" (yes, I propose that we add "-1 Lame" to the moderation system).

      Personally, I'd say the post was "insightful". After all, the Trademark system already **does** provide all the tools necessary to protect full sentences already, the only reason it's not being used more frequently is that the cost to do so for a newspaper is just too prohibitive.

      But when it comes down to it, all the issues would be the same. In order to be workable, newspapers would have to find unique sentences that had never previously been published by other newspapers, and that would never be normally used commonly. The resulting headlines would be mismashes of sensationalist gobbledygook, incorrect spellings, and grammatically incorrect turns of phrases -- just to make sure they remained unique and uniquely unusable by others (otherwise, they'll lose all their value).

  18. Wont fly... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If, however they patented the construction of headlines by employing the same kind of absurd semantic abstractions that allow borderline retards to will software patents into existence... Eye-Pee institutions would be only too eager to accommodate such misguided stupidity.

  19. Big Deal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We have a monopoly on kicking their ass.

  20. Word Permutations by alphahydroxy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    These publishers need to learn a little about combinometrics. The Associated Press said they wanted to be able to copyright phrases as short as five words. Consider a 500 words story which would have 495 five word phrases which could then match up to anything that was ever written -- or just try googling for the exact string. I just googled the string containing the 2nd-6th words of this comment, "said they wanted to be", and got 3.2 million hits. If AP had gotten their way with the copyrights bit, AP would have had to have determined who had the rights to this phrase and negotiate use with the owner. Then AP would have to search for the owner of the string containing the 3rd to 7th words, "they wanted to be able" which had 7.8 million hits. And so on. Further this would have to be repeated for six, seven, ... word strings. Someone must have pointed out to AP how they would be not just hoisted, by destroyed by their own petard. This inane copyright that the German publishers are proposing would end up preventing them from writing headlines.

    1. Re:Word Permutations by imthesponge · · Score: 1

      This is intentional; everyone will have to pay a fee to some "association" in order to use the language. Negotiation with individual copyright holders isn't required in that case.

    2. Re:Word Permutations by Concerned+Onlooker · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Perhaps news stories will then have to appear with NO headlines. People will be forced to delve into each story to figure out what it is about. I see an underground internet movement springing up that provides access to mapping stories up with "illegal" headlines, hosted on servers located on boats with satellite connections and guarded by some guys with wooden legs. Bumper stickers will start appearing. "Free the Headlines!" Most people, however, will avoid illegal headline servers and continue to wander aimlessly through their newspapers trying to figure out what they might like to read. Eventually they will get tired of this and stop reading newspapers altogether.

      --
      http://www.rootstrikers.org/
    3. Re:Word Permutations by king+neckbeard · · Score: 2, Funny

      Eventually they will get tired of this and stop reading newspapers altogether.

      Hasn't that already happened? I mean, I thought newspapers being dead was why Rupert Murdoch was yelling about the internet and the end of the free ride. Maybe he's just off his meds.

      --
      This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    4. Re:Word Permutations by Casualposter · · Score: 1

      Ah, yes! Everyone uses language. Copyright language. NOW, everyone uses YOUR copyrighted language. SO! PROFITS RAIN DOWN FROM THE SKY! Well, that is exactly how the drug addled minds behind these schemes think. SO the next best thing is to TAX everyone for using language.

      Well, we know where all of the communists and socialists are. This is nothing more than redistribution of wealth!

      --
      Creative Spelling Copyright (2002). May use without Persimmons
  21. From the "copyright ratchet" article: by John+Hasler · · Score: 1

    > On the other hand, it is unusual that the U.S. would agree to agree to
    > another country's intellectual property regimen: It doesn't have to.

    I guess that must be why the USA never signed the Berne convention, which would have drastically expanded copyright owner's rights.

    Oh. Wait...

    --
    Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    1. Re:From the "copyright ratchet" article: by king+neckbeard · · Score: 1

      We did resist it a very long time, though. It took 102 years to formally adopt, while one could argue that some other countries are adopting the laws US copyright holders are pushing before the US bothers to adopt them.

      --
      This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    2. Re:From the "copyright ratchet" article: by Bigjeff5 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The article is right about about the "copyright ratchet", but it's extremely short-sighted and, frankly, wrong when it says that it is the US pushing its laws onto the rest of the world. It has recently been driven by the US - things like the DMCA and Sonny Bono act and such, but most of the draconian copyright laws did not exist in the US until the 60's, where we were the ones who were "ratcheted up" to the rest of the world's standards, which had already been ratcheted up by the French (who still have the most restrictive copyright laws in the world, in my opinion). The French still give far more rights to author's/artists than the US does, so to say it is US driven is a little disingenuous, or at the very least completely ignorant of history. It also goes squarely against the articles main point: that copyright harmonization is any different than any other harmonization. There are swings back and forth.

      The real difference between copyright harmonization and other types of harmonization is copyright law affects everyone every single day, where most laws only affect a few people at any given time. Yet only a very small number of people are involved in the decision making process. Our supposed representatives are too easily swayed by lobbyists, they aren't considering the people any more.

      --
      Security is mostly a superstition... Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. - Helen Keller
    3. Re:From the "copyright ratchet" article: by Bigjeff5 · · Score: 2, Informative

      French copyright still gives far more rights to the creators than US copyright, and it always has. It was one of the driving forces behind the Berne convention.

      --
      Security is mostly a superstition... Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. - Helen Keller
    4. Re:From the "copyright ratchet" article: by king+neckbeard · · Score: 1

      And despite the pressure from the US media conglomerates, the US still has one of the largest areas of fair use/fair dealing and copyright exceptions. I would even go as far as to suggest that our media conglomerates formed largely because of the fair use and generally more lax copyright stance in the US.

      --
      This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    5. Re:From the "copyright ratchet" article: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Funny, given that the French have so little of value to actually copyright :-)

  22. Go for the Essentials by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Guess Il take out a patent on having bright ideas, then. Any bright idea will then belong to me.

    Or snide remarks. That's a good one. Oh, there's a world of activity ahead.

    If this goes on, then, will everyone be forced to develop their own language, eventually ? What about translators between individuals ? Will they be possible or viable without large contracts and at least two different patents ? Will there be "club" OR "group" translators? Imagine the legal complexity! Or a "lengua general". Or inter-group translator translators ? Get real !

    Solves the problem of humanity actually evolving, though. Nature, of course, might just cut through the bostercaria and make people telepathic. Until someone patents the genes on that, of course. Artificial interpersonal electronic "telepathy", though, might be a bit easier. But the open source version could have an operational issue, or two.

    Is someone trying to get German press blacklisted in the world ?

  23. Anyone who takes steps to use force of law (which by D4C5CE · · Score: 2, Interesting

    ...ultimately comes from the barrel of a gun) to steal from society

    few people realize that was [Ayn Rand's] principle point

    This view seems at least as old as Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, Qu'est-ce que la propriété?, 1840 (quite a different school of thought than Objectivism for sure).

    With respect to Ayn Rand's contributions to be revisited for the present debate, one might rather point at the bureaucrats' stance in Atlas Shrugged:
    Not wanting their laws observed but broken to cash in on guilt as it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws.

    One thing's for sure if you could get the followers of both authors to agree:
    The proposed bill would be, to rehash Lawrence Lessig's take on the dreaded DMCA, "bad law and bad policy."

  24. This sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    (c) 2010, Anonymous Coward.

  25. Enough with the pranks! by wringles · · Score: 1

    Fools` Day was two months ago!

  26. Sentences? by Mindbridge · · Score: 1

    I thought the judicial system has the monopoly on that!

  27. To be fair, by JavaTHut · · Score: 1

    a sentence in German has roughly the length of a book in English, so they're just bringing things up to parity with the US.

  28. Tough, but not as bad as article suggests by alhague · · Score: 2, Informative

    >In Germany, newspaper publishers are lobbying for 'a new exclusive right conferring the power to monopolize speech e.g. by assigning a right to re-use a particular wording in the headline of a news article anywhere else without the permission of the rights holder

    This is not quite true. The auxiliary copyright ("Leistungsschutzrecht", draft leaked: http://www.irights.info/index.php?q=node/880) is mostly aimed against big players such as Google (News) who systematically and continuously reuse headlines, snippets and images from publishers for their own profit (selling ads) without paying (in the publisher's mind: adequate) royalties. The average blogger commenting (and quoting) a certain news story is not meant to be affected... but, of course we know, laws like these tend to get out of hand.

    1. Re:Tough, but not as bad as article suggests by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My first thought was regarding news aggregators too. An extremely short term copyright on headlines would be sufficient and fair. Something like 5 days. A week, tops. That would be sufficient to extract cash from the likes of Google without ruining it for the rest of us.

  29. Music Publishers are Worse by jvillain · · Score: 1

    Members of the North American music cabal claim that simple chord changes are copyrightable and so exclusively theirs. They have been ordering take down notices for showing such things as the chord changes to Knocking on Heavens Door for example, which has the same chord changes as a million other songs going back thousands of years.

    1. Re:Music Publishers are Worse by yyxx · · Score: 1

      Members of the North American music cabal claim that simple chord changes are copyrightable and so exclusively theirs.

      So do music publishers around the world. German music publishers actually have quite successfully managed even many classical works from falling into the public domain through various shenanigans.

      But bad as that may be, music is not essential to freedom, free speech is.

    2. Re:Music Publishers are Worse by Sparx139 · · Score: 1

      which has the same chord changes as a million other songs going back thousands of years.

      I figured that that this offers a concrete demonstration of what you mean

      --
      Our culture doesn't get smarter, it just finds new ways of being retarded.
  30. section 71: Posthumous Works, completely insane by Khashishi · · Score: 1

    Wow, it completely turns the concept of public domain on its head. Watch the mad rush as people snatch up exclusive rights to publish old works like the bible.... Complete insanity.

  31. Talking about pirates... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Every German who didn't vote for the Piratenpartei is personally responsible for this law.

  32. Sieg Heil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When did the fourth estate become the fourth reich?

  33. Here, You Can Have This Sentence. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All our sentences are yours. We will descend into the preliterate morass (oops, that is one of your sentences isn't it).

    Bye now.

  34. No surprise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    T-mobile = Deutsche Telecom already claimed magenta as their brand color at the EU trade mark certificate bureau. The next step is a patent on water.

  35. I Will Not Let Them Do This by NicknamesAreStupid · · Score: 1

    It violates my patent on stupid ideas.

  36. Awesome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I want monopoly on "First post!"

  37. This comes as no real surprise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Scientific publishers want to be able to license works at the paragraph level - ostensibly to allow them to create mashups from current works. But once they can do this how small a chunk will become fair use?

    1. Re:This comes as no real surprise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If a research or a publication require to quote large sections of a licensed work in order to make the cultural or scientific point, it still belongs to fair use. If a publisher uses a single paragraph as a part of a commercial service it is not fair use. If the publishers want to create a possibility of creating mashups profitably, perhaps they will eventually consider supporting the anti-copyright people against Disneys and RIAAs of this world.

  38. Sieg Heil? by haggus71 · · Score: 1

    What? Control of information from the same people that gave us the National Socialist Party? Never!!!

  39. And how many fail on Orwell's precedent? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And how many fail on Orwell's precedent? He got there first with 1984. It was all about making laws that could be enforced on a whim.

    I think that predated Atlas. But people forget so easy.

    Shrug.

    1. Re:And how many fail on Orwell's precedent? by king+neckbeard · · Score: 1

      This has gone too far. We are having a pointless discussion on who an idea 'belongs to' when we are all criticizing abusive copyright laws. You could argue that quite a few touched upon this issues during the Enlightenment, and that it was probably discussed a bit by Plato and his peers/successors (maybe less directly), and it very well may have been addressed before the formation of early governments.

      --
      This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
  40. Bitte hochmodden! by martin-boundary · · Score: 1

    Issmawasanres...

  41. I guess he doesn't read Bash.org ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > sigh, sorry my stupid little brother saw i was still logged in and decided to insult people using my account

    I wonder why he didn't type, "HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT, I SUCK COCKS"?

  42. quick by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    quick someone patent "publish this story" they will be screwed

  43. I wouldn't worry about it elsewhere by yyxx · · Score: 1

    This kind of nonsense is par for the course for Germany. People can sue you if they feel insulted, offended, or blasphemed. In fact, in many cases, they can simply send you a letter asking you for money without so much as a court case. Publishers already extract huge amounts of money from electronic equipment, copiers, and blank media. I think it's part of Germany's fascist heritage.

    No matter how greedy publishers in other nations may be, they are not going to be able to get these kinds of laws, copyright ratchet or not; Germany's laws in this area mare in fundamental conflict with principles of free speech and they wouldn't stand a constitutional test in the US or elsewhere.

  44. worse if you look at the context by yyxx · · Score: 1

    And there, in a nutshell, do you have the reason why German politicians and media are grilling Google alive over Streetview and WiFi packet data: they want to demolish Google's reputation in order to make it easy for them to push their own money-making anti-Google agenda.

  45. last time by yyxx · · Score: 1

    Just remember that last time dying German industries took over the government with right-wing populist ideologies, millions of people died.

  46. they won't care either by yyxx · · Score: 1

    The German public won't care or understand; as long as the masses still get their boulevard press with big breasted women on the cover, they're happy. Many of them pay for it with government-provided benefits anyway.

  47. you need to learn about monopolies by yyxx · · Score: 1

    This inane copyright that the German publishers are proposing would end up preventing them from writing headlines.

    The problem goes away as soon as you either have only a single publisher or a small cartel of publishers. That way, the members of the cartel can publish freely and nobody else can ever compete with them. "Combinometrics" works in their favor, since they already have vast archives with all these phrases.

  48. Sentences? by shikaisi · · Score: 1

    So if people break this law, will they be given sentences for using sentences?

    --
    No left turn unstoned.
  49. +3 and +5 Karma? by spaceturtle · · Score: 1

    Well it seems like you got a +3 "Funny" and a +5 "Informative". Do *you* need the Karma? Maybe you'd like to lend your account to your little brother more often :P.

  50. All for copyrights on sentences by Jason+Levine · · Score: 1

    I'm all for copyrights on sentences. Because after that will come copyrights on individual words and then copyrights on individual letters. I've already got copyright applications pending for A, E, I, O, and U. (I'm considering a copyright on Y as well.) Soon I'll be very rich. Well, either that or everyone will switch to a language with completely different letters like Russian or Chinese.

    --
    My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
  51. Erich Tyler John by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This Headline Now Copyright.

  52. Diese Schlagzeile jetzt Urheberrecht. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Erich Tyler John

  53. Good Luck With That (C)(TM) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Also, "Suck it."

  54. Hmm... by Galestar · · Score: 1

    1. Generate millions of random sentences. Put them up on a webpage.
    2. Sue anyone else who uses any of those sentences.
    3. ???
    4. Profit!!

    --
    AccountKiller
    1. Re:Hmm... by Galestar · · Score: 1

      P.S. The above sentences are copyrighted. Quoting them will be considered infringement.

      --
      AccountKiller
  55. No more headlines! by Drakkenmensch · · Score: 1

    When it becomes impossible or cost prohibitive to track down and pay the holder of specific headlines, or when the amount of headlines patented makes it near impossible to create a current one... why bother? It will eventually become easier for german magazines to simply NOT put a title to their articles and just stick them under the correct category. Politics, national, regional, sports and so on. When everyone realizes just how crazy the whole deal was and this silly idea gets dropped, headlines will return.