This just goes to show how much power the DMCA gives work holders to kill off fair use. You can't have fair use rights if the mere addition of a copy protection device stops you from making backups.
Well, *ahem*, it doesn't actually stop you but it is illegal to break that copy protection even in the pursuit of employing what you perceive as fair use rights with your *ahem* their property.
Music, movies, TV and computer programs are all able to be copy protected. All big business needs to do is copy protect all of these media and fair use rights will be a memory, a piece of legislation killed off for everyone. In Australia, we are considering putting fair use rights in our copyright legislation, but the US forced DMCA provisions into our Free Trade Agreement and we are stuck with trying to find a way to employ fair use provisions with these severe restrictions on what we are allowed to do.
A work not available for commercial purchase from a rights holder for a period of 10 years or more (less for software) shall lapse and go into public domain. This does not include where said works have been upgraded (such as Quickbooks version 1.0 lapsing into public domain when Quickbooks version 12.0 is out) or replaced (such as Star Wars : Theatrical Version lapsing into public domain where Star Wars - Special Edition is released). It must be made commercially available by a resident entity for sale within the country you live in, either in a physical format or a digital format to the general public.
This forces work owners such as the music industry to make all owned works available for purchase. It also allows the public to have the usage of items that would otherwise lapse into obscurity or prevented from being used due to copyright but not used due to a lack of commercial interest for a very long period of time. It can force artists to ensure that the owner and distributor of their songs to make use of their work or to release their works back to them at risk of the distributor / owner to be sued by letting their work lapse into the public domain. This does not prevent them from selling the works but does not prevent others from doing so as well.
In short, it forces work owners to sell their works or give them to the public.
A transitional period allowing a future date for which all works are considered under the legislation to be commercially available should be established and in the ten year period following all works must be made available for sale, even for example though an online store, or the rights holders will lose their rights into the public domain. They will have two choices, they can either make works available for sale (which means that they make a profit from them) or they do not make works available for sale (which means they would make a loss from selling them, so by not selling them they avoid the loss) which releases it into the public domain. In this manner, there would be no losses for work holders, but profits from the sale of more works and benefits for the public by the increased variety of choices and more works to enjoy in the public domain.
This is actually quite important for international laws. Why? The US threatens sanctions / boycotts / action against countries that do not enforce movie and music industry laws US-style. What you see in the US at the moment is typically reflected in your country 4 years later thanks to MPAA/RIAA paid off politicians.
The US needs to ensure that such copyrights and laws are enforceable overseas as the US entertainment industry is one of its largest export industries and any perceived watering down of their rights to profit from these works will be attacked most vehemently. The entertainment industry is probably the industry of the future for the US since it is offshoring almost anything it can.
Examples- U.S. Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez threatens tariffs or import restrictions on IP laws unless they control piracy. It is really dangerous for the US to threaten China on anything at the moment especially since they need their help to put down North Korea. Sweden gets threatened and shamed at the way they let piracy bittorrent sites run rampant. Lo and behold, legislation comes into effect on July 1 to curb this threat. Australia signs an FTA where one of the conditions is that US IP laws are enforceable in Australia despite the fact that it is US law, not Australian law, superceding the right of that country to make laws to govern themselves. Suits started in America against filesharers are starting to appear overseas.
Many people in the anime industry state that people are buying the more popular series (Gundam, Naruto) and not buying the "b" titles. Smaller more niche titles are just not paying for themselves and may result in more big blockbuster Hollywood style anime series being made. Less stuff like Berserk and Hellsing and more stuff like Pokemuck and Digicrap may be made.
Everything has a price, including free entertainment.
As long as they state on the blog who they are paid by, I'm fine with it. It is where they don't tell you that they get paid to do it that I get concerned about where blogging is taking itself.
I also hear that Terrorists make money out of oil sales so lets stop buying oil from the Middle East.
Some charities also support terrorism so lets stop donating to all charities just in case.
Oh, and the US government has also supported terrorist groups in the past so lets stop paying our taxes.
I also heard, and I can't quote this, that terrorists breathe AIR so we should all hold our breath until we catch them all!
Political opportunism at its best, courtesy of the MPAA and RIAA. Of course they are probably learning from the Bush administration that if you use the word "terrorist" often enough, you can get away with anything.
And I am sure that when they draft the legislation that they will ensure that they will make a clear distinction between the street vendors of pirated DVDs and p2p users in penalties and sentencing.
The car of the future won't be for driving. It will be an entertainment device that just happens to take us where we want to go automatically and we just watch TV and movies, listen to music, call people up etc while we wait.
Why stop at $200 million BSA? Why not just say nine zillion billion dollars are lost to copyright inf..oh, I mean "pirates"? Obviously the more the better and you don't even have to provide proof for your figures.
Thought Thieves is about people stealing and profiting from your creation or innovation. Think about it: how would you feel if you saw your hard work being passed off as the property of someone else? What would you do?
Why, if for example, someone stole my idea for a graphical OS interface and.....oh. Umm, well, if someone decided to use a programming language I wrote called "java" and change it without permission in their OS, I would...erm. Oh, I know, I'll take out a patent for surfing the web with a keyboard even after everyone has been doing that for so many yea....uhm.
Ah yes, Microsoft. A shining example to everyone about corporate ethics and responsible citizenship.
Bloody hell Microsoft, my thoughts are now your property?
Look, there are somethings I take for granted in life. Love, air, speech and I'll take on Microsoft if its wants to go around saying that "thoughts" are intellectial property.
IP is a complete mess. If they ever get around to building a starship to get to the stars, they would have to settle probably about 16,000 patent claims to even build it.
Hmm, most mathematicians that go to Hollywood end up getting their maths screwed up. Thats where 1 infringing copy = $150,000 in damages. I'd get out of there quickly if I were that guy.
The problem is that the fair use laws being suggested prevent it from being used for anything that has some form of copy protection or that specifically mentions that copying is not authorised.
Which means we can now legally tape stuff off TV but not much else.
The Orwellian legislation being thrown through government annoys me to no end. Copyright should be about making our lives better and richer, balancing the needs of owners and the public and now it is all about maximising the value of these copyrighted "assets" such as Mickey Mouse and the Happy Birthday song.
The public is losing the benefit of copyright legislation as it slowly becomes more restrictive, monopolised and criminalised. The Government is failing its mission to look after the public's interests. There's no money in making it more public-friendly anyway.
Orson Scott Card is quite dismissive of Star Trek as "baby" Sci-Fi but it did expose people to the world of sci-fi for the first time. So should it be dismissed as being primitive? Or heralded as paving the path for future sci fi series? I don't believe that we would have as much sci fi on tv today if it wasn't for shows such as Star Trek and Star Wars showing a vision of the future (and the bankability of sci fi shows).
However, I think calling "Lost" a sci fi series (?!?!?) is pushing the boundaries a bit. Have new technologies, aliens or space travel appeared in Lost yet? I haven't been watching.
Wait until the government "finds" the DNA thread that makes people more susceptible to becoming child molestors and tags all the potentials.
C'mon America, you are becoming a very bad example of a democracy by allowing the wholescale slaughter of your civil rights and exporting them to the rest of the world.
Copyright law used to be about promoting innovation. Now its about perpetuating monopolies on something truly unique and valuable to the human race - knowledge. Copyright nowadays brings to mind lawyers and lawsuits, not innovation.
The very fact that bodies such as the MPAA and RIAA are suing their customers left and right is a clear indication that copyright law as it stands has failed. Any chance of loosening it up for the benefit of consumers?
I think we should run an ad in every movie theatre for MPAA members and affiliates to remind them that "Paying off cops is a crime". We could even show the cops who were paid off in the ad to remind them what happens if you bribe law enforcement officials as part of the cops settlement arrangement.
They want us to obey the law but forget to do it themselves. Great example guys.
Can't we just enjoy the film for what it is rather than what it is not? In a world where crap like Alone in the Dark gets released, at least we can show movie companies what can be done on a shoe string budget with better writing.
Slashdot Mirror
First the companies complain that the public is stealing their work.
Then the companies steal the public domain right out from under our feet.
Pot - Kettle - Black ?
This just goes to show how much power the DMCA gives work holders to kill off fair use. You can't have fair use rights if the mere addition of a copy protection device stops you from making backups. Well, *ahem*, it doesn't actually stop you but it is illegal to break that copy protection even in the pursuit of employing what you perceive as fair use rights with your *ahem* their property. Music, movies, TV and computer programs are all able to be copy protected. All big business needs to do is copy protect all of these media and fair use rights will be a memory, a piece of legislation killed off for everyone. In Australia, we are considering putting fair use rights in our copyright legislation, but the US forced DMCA provisions into our Free Trade Agreement and we are stuck with trying to find a way to employ fair use provisions with these severe restrictions on what we are allowed to do.
A work not available for commercial purchase from a rights holder for a period of 10 years or more (less for software) shall lapse and go into public domain. This does not include where said works have been upgraded (such as Quickbooks version 1.0 lapsing into public domain when Quickbooks version 12.0 is out) or replaced (such as Star Wars : Theatrical Version lapsing into public domain where Star Wars - Special Edition is released). It must be made commercially available by a resident entity for sale within the country you live in, either in a physical format or a digital format to the general public.
This forces work owners such as the music industry to make all owned works available for purchase. It also allows the public to have the usage of items that would otherwise lapse into obscurity or prevented from being used due to copyright but not used due to a lack of commercial interest for a very long period of time. It can force artists to ensure that the owner and distributor of their songs to make use of their work or to release their works back to them at risk of the distributor / owner to be sued by letting their work lapse into the public domain. This does not prevent them from selling the works but does not prevent others from doing so as well.
In short, it forces work owners to sell their works or give them to the public.
A transitional period allowing a future date for which all works are considered under the legislation to be commercially available should be established and in the ten year period following all works must be made available for sale, even for example though an online store, or the rights holders will lose their rights into the public domain. They will have two choices, they can either make works available for sale (which means that they make a profit from them) or they do not make works available for sale (which means they would make a loss from selling them, so by not selling them they avoid the loss) which releases it into the public domain. In this manner, there would be no losses for work holders, but profits from the sale of more works and benefits for the public by the increased variety of choices and more works to enjoy in the public domain.
This is actually quite important for international laws. Why? The US threatens sanctions / boycotts / action against countries that do not enforce movie and music industry laws US-style. What you see in the US at the moment is typically reflected in your country 4 years later thanks to MPAA/RIAA paid off politicians.
The US needs to ensure that such copyrights and laws are enforceable overseas as the US entertainment industry is one of its largest export industries and any perceived watering down of their rights to profit from these works will be attacked most vehemently. The entertainment industry is probably the industry of the future for the US since it is offshoring almost anything it can.
Examples-
U.S. Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez threatens tariffs or import restrictions on IP laws unless they control piracy. It is really dangerous for the US to threaten China on anything at the moment especially since they need their help to put down North Korea.
Sweden gets threatened and shamed at the way they let piracy bittorrent sites run rampant. Lo and behold, legislation comes into effect on July 1 to curb this threat.
Australia signs an FTA where one of the conditions is that US IP laws are enforceable in Australia despite the fact that it is US law, not Australian law, superceding the right of that country to make laws to govern themselves.
Suits started in America against filesharers are starting to appear overseas.
Many people in the anime industry state that people are buying the more popular series (Gundam, Naruto) and not buying the "b" titles. Smaller more niche titles are just not paying for themselves and may result in more big blockbuster Hollywood style anime series being made. Less stuff like Berserk and Hellsing and more stuff like Pokemuck and Digicrap may be made.
Everything has a price, including free entertainment.
As long as they state on the blog who they are paid by, I'm fine with it. It is where they don't tell you that they get paid to do it that I get concerned about where blogging is taking itself.
I also hear that Terrorists make money out of oil sales so lets stop buying oil from the Middle East. Some charities also support terrorism so lets stop donating to all charities just in case. Oh, and the US government has also supported terrorist groups in the past so lets stop paying our taxes. I also heard, and I can't quote this, that terrorists breathe AIR so we should all hold our breath until we catch them all! Political opportunism at its best, courtesy of the MPAA and RIAA. Of course they are probably learning from the Bush administration that if you use the word "terrorist" often enough, you can get away with anything.
[sarcasm on]
And I am sure that when they draft the legislation that they will ensure that they will make a clear distinction between the street vendors of pirated DVDs and p2p users in penalties and sentencing.
[/sarcasm off]
The car of the future won't be for driving. It will be an entertainment device that just happens to take us where we want to go automatically and we just watch TV and movies, listen to music, call people up etc while we wait.
I wonder if Bram Cohen could sue for slander? That's his precious baby getting slung through the mud there.
Why stop at $200 million BSA? Why not just say nine zillion billion dollars are lost to copyright inf..oh, I mean "pirates"? Obviously the more the better and you don't even have to provide proof for your figures.
Thought Thieves is about people stealing and profiting from your creation or innovation. Think about it: how would you feel if you saw your hard work being passed off as the property of someone else? What would you do?
Why, if for example, someone stole my idea for a graphical OS interface and.....oh. Umm, well, if someone decided to use a programming language I wrote called "java" and change it without permission in their OS, I would...erm. Oh, I know, I'll take out a patent for surfing the web with a keyboard even after everyone has been doing that for so many yea....uhm.
Ah yes, Microsoft. A shining example to everyone about corporate ethics and responsible citizenship.
Bloody hell Microsoft, my thoughts are now your property?
Look, there are somethings I take for granted in life. Love, air, speech and I'll take on Microsoft if its wants to go around saying that "thoughts" are intellectial property.
IP is a complete mess. If they ever get around to building a starship to get to the stars, they would have to settle probably about 16,000 patent claims to even build it.
Hmm, most mathematicians that go to Hollywood end up getting their maths screwed up. Thats where 1 infringing copy = $150,000 in damages. I'd get out of there quickly if I were that guy.
The problem is that the fair use laws being suggested prevent it from being used for anything that has some form of copy protection or that specifically mentions that copying is not authorised. Which means we can now legally tape stuff off TV but not much else.
Maybe Google is us a favour from having our noodles overheat while reading their front page.
The Orwellian legislation being thrown through government annoys me to no end. Copyright should be about making our lives better and richer, balancing the needs of owners and the public and now it is all about maximising the value of these copyrighted "assets" such as Mickey Mouse and the Happy Birthday song.
The public is losing the benefit of copyright legislation as it slowly becomes more restrictive, monopolised and criminalised. The Government is failing its mission to look after the public's interests. There's no money in making it more public-friendly anyway.
Cool, a "brainwashing" badge. Close the minds of our youth rather than opening them.
At least these may stop those horrible HK anime DVDs.
Orson Scott Card is quite dismissive of Star Trek as "baby" Sci-Fi but it did expose people to the world of sci-fi for the first time. So should it be dismissed as being primitive? Or heralded as paving the path for future sci fi series? I don't believe that we would have as much sci fi on tv today if it wasn't for shows such as Star Trek and Star Wars showing a vision of the future (and the bankability of sci fi shows).
However, I think calling "Lost" a sci fi series (?!?!?) is pushing the boundaries a bit. Have new technologies, aliens or space travel appeared in Lost yet? I haven't been watching.
Wait until the government "finds" the DNA thread that makes people more susceptible to becoming child molestors and tags all the potentials. C'mon America, you are becoming a very bad example of a democracy by allowing the wholescale slaughter of your civil rights and exporting them to the rest of the world.
They have no plans for a PC port.
Copyright law used to be about promoting innovation. Now its about perpetuating monopolies on something truly unique and valuable to the human race - knowledge. Copyright nowadays brings to mind lawyers and lawsuits, not innovation.
The very fact that bodies such as the MPAA and RIAA are suing their customers left and right is a clear indication that copyright law as it stands has failed. Any chance of loosening it up for the benefit of consumers?
I think we should run an ad in every movie theatre for MPAA members and affiliates to remind them that "Paying off cops is a crime". We could even show the cops who were paid off in the ad to remind them what happens if you bribe law enforcement officials as part of the cops settlement arrangement.
They want us to obey the law but forget to do it themselves. Great example guys.
Can't we just enjoy the film for what it is rather than what it is not? In a world where crap like Alone in the Dark gets released, at least we can show movie companies what can be done on a shoe string budget with better writing.
Connection failed. Again and again. bleh.
If I can't even connect to the torrent file itself, imagine what the tracker is going through right now.
There was a female doctor, in the episode "The Curse of the Fatal Death". Joanna Lumley. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0212887/