Slashdot Mirror
The Privatization of Copyright Lawmaking
An anonymous reader writes with this excerpt from TorrentFreak:
"The biggest misperception about [the Stop Online Piracy Act] is that it is somehow unprecedented or extraordinary. It is not. SOPA represents just the latest example of copyright law defined and controlled not by the government but by private entities. Copyright owners will deploy SOPA in the same way they have behaved in the past: to extend out their rights. They will disrupt sites that do not infringe a copyright, interfere with fair uses of copyrighted works, and take other steps that evade the limits that the Copyright Act sets on a copyright owner's actual rights."
And why does the American people still tolerate this again? Surely, in a democracy, every law should be in its people's best interest, no?
In Capitalist US, the commerce controls the Government.
America is totally corrupt. How many of the current US politicians are not taking corporate handouts, accepting meetings with lobbyists, or preaching 'free market' ideology. It has to be accepted that America is a banana republic, run by a mafia of corporate interests, and a collection of crazed religious zealots. I am just so glad I don't live there.
In a democracy, there is a choice of government. Choice is impossible in the United States, because the Republican/Democrat Party, is the only party that can attract enough campaign contributions. The Republican/Democrat Party, is consequently the only party that can buy power. This is not democracy.
The private elite have influenced western politics for at LEAST a century or three
Over recent years there has been an accelerating plunge into rule by corporation in its interests rather than rule by government in the interests of all. This has resulted in the loosening of regulation or oversight, laws allow corporations to do things that are effectively disallowed to individuals. The results of this include: the financial woes of recent times; copyright abuse; globalisation for corporation but not individuals (think: they buy where it is cheap in the world, but stop you doing so, eg by region encoding).
This has happened by a variety of means: bribing of law makers (whoops silly me, I mean - donations to campaigns and pet causes, promises of jobs on leaving office, ...); threats to move to another country; ...
Don't get me wrong: not everything about corporations is bad, not all corporations are problematic. A restoration of balance is needed.
The answer is, that the system delivers what most of people consider to be most essential, namely: Bread and circuses. Of course this reasoning preceded the Roman Republic's transformation into the Roman Empire before it's ultimate collapse
Run with the lemmings, and you'll get your feet wet.
Oh, I thought, that was what "IKEA" means.
Oh, the beautiful gloss of greality!
...Applies to every satellite State of Britain, former and current. The specific section implies the obligation upon Law-abiding citizenry to Lawfully disobey bad Law. This is the only way in which it will get changed. If we sit there and take it up the arse every time our basic civil rights are infringed those who make black-letter Law will carry on until we are deprived of the freedom to make our own choices. That said, it is up to you: will you argue for your rights in a public forum, even if that forum consists of thirteen men and women, even if it means the total loss of liberty for an unspecified period? Will you take that argument to a wider audience, for example by way of media, considering that this action is not without personal risk? Will you risk your life for your freedom as your grandparents did and your great grandparents did (I ask as a Gen. X-er)? Or will you bend over and take it up the arse like a good little sheep?
Lawful Rebellion doesn't mean asking permission to protest. If you have a grievance, make a peaceful and nonviolent show of obstructing a public space and broadcasting your grievance. Let the Corporate Enforcement Officers (AKA Police) make the first violent or unlawful move, and make sure you have the video camera running when they do. And when they do, the Court of Public Opinion shall judge them.
Operation Guillotine is in effect.
The Constitution of the United States of America had a nod to a limited copyright, with the idea that it would promote the arts and sciences for there to be a period of time in which the original creator of an idea would be able to profit from it. (Article 1, Section 8 of the United States Constitution, wherein it states as a goal "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;")
Here's an article entitled The Founding Fathers Had Copyright Right, explaining how and why copyright was first introduced (back when the U.S.A. was just a twinkle in the founding fathers' eyes). It bears little resemblance to the convoluted and draconian system we now have in place.
As of 1790, that "limited time" was a period of 14 years, with a possible 14 year extension (assuming the author was still alive), for a possible maximum of 28 years from date of creation. Those periods were more than double those originally specified in earlier documents, which ranged from 5 to 7 years.
More recently, the Copyright Term Extension Act has shoved everything in quite the wrong direction for anything to ever reach the public domain.
For example:
Mickey Mouse was created in 1928. Mickey Mouse's likeness will not be legal to reproduce without a license until 2036, or maybe even 2047 (there is some legalistic ambiguity). And that's assuming that the copyright laws are not changed yet again to suit corporate greed... Because, you know, Disney hasn't had enough time to properly profit from Mickey Mouse yet, since he's only 83 years old!
If that example isn't broken enough for you, have a look at this list of when things enter the public domain, and note that the current copyright law ensures that a book published on 15 March 1923 will enter the public domain on 1 January 2019, despite nearly everyone who was alive when it was published being dead now - nevermind 7 more years. It also shows that a sound recording published in 1978 will enter the public domain no earlier than 2049. If it was recorded prior to 1972, then it won't become public domain until at least 2067. This literally means that music recorded before I was born will not be in the public domain before I die. I expect this holds true for most of us, actually, and not just me. As an aside, this is also why restaurants do not sing "Happy Birthday" with the lyrics and melody you learned growing up.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.