|
search / subscribe / upload / contact |
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
| RSS-Feed Depeschen |  |
|
|
||
|
||
Date: 1999-01-20
US-Copyright/gesetze: Meinungsfreiheit abgedreht-.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- Gesetze werden eines weitaus schlimmere Wirkung auf die Rede-und Informationsfreiheit im Netze haben, als jedes Communications Decency Amendment, meint der Kolumnist von USA Today. -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- Sam Vincent Meddis 1999 JAN 19 .... A totally different assault on our constitutional rights has gained relatively little notice, however. It's the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, which was signed by President Clinton in October while the nation's attention was riveted on the upcoming congressional elections and impeachment proceedings. ... When it came to the copyright law, it wasn't the political clout of the overreligious right to which Washington kowtowed. Instead, it was intense lobbying of a special- interest congloberate made up of the music, film and software industries. Few would argue that strong enforcement of copyright isn't essential. On the contrary, it's perhaps more essential than ever, because our digital networks make it as effortless as a few mouse clicks to illegally duplicate everything from songs to computer operating systems. ... But in their zeal to prevent the Chinese, say, from appropriating Disney's Mickey Mouse ears, our nation's lawmakers went too far and too fast. In short, the new copyright law helps to protect the revenue streams of well- heeled industries at the risk of impoverishing free expression on the Internet. Let's look back at earlier scares. The debut of photocopying machines made publishers nervous that readers would start making illegal copies of books. Similarly, the movie industry feared that videotape recorders might drive down their profits. ... With the Web still its infancy and growing at a dizzying pace, this was surely not the time for Washington to lock us into copyright rules based on the congloberate's worst-case scenarios. ... Its First Amendment Outrage of the Week warned of a claustrophobic pay-per-view future: "If, for instance, a famous singer dies, don't expect to hear snippets of her tunes on an online newscast the way you would on TV or radio. Practices that are routine on the air become illegal online. It gets worse. Educational Web sites can now face criminal penalties for offering the same information -- some of it in the public domain, no less -- that you can walk down to your local library and pull off the shelf." Last week I participated in a panel on copyright law at the Forum and heard Carl Kaplan, a public interest lawyer and cyber-law columnist for The New York Times, describe where he thinks we're headed. "Today, it's music; tomorrow, it's e- books," he said. "This is the future; everything will cost money, and all the free uses -- for scholarship, criticism, reporting -- will go out the window." So naturally I was glad to see that same week the launch of at least one serious challenge to new copyright regulations. The Eldritch Press, a non-profit organization that posts literary works for free on its Web site, filed a lawsuit seeking to overturn a provision in another law signed in October that extends copyright protections for authors from 50 to 70 years after their death, and works such as movies from 75 to 95 years. The Constitution confers upon Congress the authority: "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." .... We don't need to wonder what the framers might have had in mind by that definition. The original copyright statute of 1790 granted copyright terms of only 14 years, with a 14 year renewal period. ... Jonathan Zittrain of Harvard's Berkman Center for Internet and Society, which represents Eldritch in its copyright lawsuit, told me in a telephone interview that Web users will be asked for their support. The goal is to kindle an online campaign, perhaps not unlike the one that helped slap down the Communications Decency Act. Source http://www.usatoday.com relayed by http://www.newsbytes.com -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- - -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- edited by Harkank published on: 1999-01-20 comments to [email protected] subscribe Newsletter - -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- 
|
|
|
 |
CURRENTLY RUNNING |
q/Talk 1.Juli: The Danger of Software Users Don't Control
|
|
|
!WATCH OUT! |
bits4free 14.Juli 2011: OpenStreetMap Erfinder Steve Coast live in Wien
|
|