[LINK] DCMA note (was democracy after it was Al-Jazeera)

[Viveka]

At 4:24 PM +1000 31/3/03, Chirgwin, Richard wrote:
>Michael - the most hopeful thing about the difference between Australia and
>the US is that if America demanded total harmonisation of copyright, someone
>would be >sure< to notice ...
>
>...because to our eyes, US copyright looks like a massive bureaucracy. You
>have to register copyright there

Brendan's pointed out that that's no longer the case; copyright is 
now automatic on creation, since they signed up to the Berne 
convention
http://www.wipo.org/treaties/ip/berne/
The US copyright office still exists though, and "Even though 
registration is not a requirement for protection, the copyright law 
provides several inducements or advantages to encourage copyright 
owners to make registration", says
http://www.copyright.gov

US copyright law was originally quite conservative, lasting only 14 
years from the date of creation.
The US constitution explicitly stated that the term of copyright 
should be limited, but the number of years was not specified. This 
has led to continuous extensions, making an effective infinite term. 
This is of course clearly in defiance of the intentions of the 
Framers (as USians refer to the authors of their constitution) - 
Thomas Jefferson said in reference to copyright terms that:
"I set out on this ground, which I suppose to be self evident, that 
the earth belongs in usufruct to the living; that the dead have 
neither powers nor rights over it . . ."
so when US copyright was first extended to a term beyond the lifetime 
of the creator, it was clearly longer than intended.

Now the copyright extension lobby is in ascension there, so terms are 
lengthening. Also, fair use rights are being eroded; unfortunately 
they don't seem to be as explicitly defined as they are in Oz law, so 
if courts have been generous in the past with collage artists and 
researchers, they may be less so in the future. At least, that's the 
perception of audio collage artists with whom I correspond. They 
consider their work, as well as critical works such as satire (which 
would be explicitly protected under our Fair Dealing provisions), to 
be probably illegal, and rely on staying under the radar of the RIAA 
and MPAA.  This is exacerbated by the perception that as artists they 
simply can't afford the US legal system, and would lose the case even 
if they were in the right. Chilling...
http://www.chillingeffects.org/

The final point is the DMCA though; this is a particularly nasty law, 
which is having a swathe of "unintended" consequences. It's damaging 
academic freedom, engineering, security, and free expression.
http://www.eff.org/IP/DMCA/20030102_dmca_unintended_consequences.html

In Oz, Division 4A of our copyright act provides some important 
exemptions that mitigate the worst effects of this kind of copyright 
extension.
  http://scaletext.law.gov.au/html/pasteact/0/244/top.htm

If our payoff for participating in the invasion of Iraq is a Free 
Trade Agreement that leads to an Oz DMCA, it will be a booby prize 
indeed. Not to mention being unable to ever re-nationalise the 
telecoms infrastructure. I suppose the privatisation of water is out 
of scope for Link, but the privatisation of electricity is almost in 
scope; when we get California-style blackouts we'll be offline for a 
while... (I remember paying the Electricity Surcharge a couple of 
years ago in an LA hotel; the bored desk guy said "oh yeah, there's a 
crisis, but those Enron guys are sorting it out")...

>On another angle, though, I was hugely depressed and disappointed that the
>Dems only let the parallel marketing legislation pass when the government
>"promised to strengthen copyright protections for software" (according to
>the news report I heard Friday).

I heard that too, and they instantly dropped several places in my 
voting preferences. I've noticed a tendency towards this before; they 
were parroting some Record Industry tripe about the horrors of MP3 a 
while ago as well. I make software for a living, so I guess they 
would expect me to be in favour of "stronger protection"; but I 
wonder how many of us are, and who the Dems are talking to, to get 
this issue so wrong. Maybe the publishers?

Regards,

V.
-- 
Viveka Weiley, Karmanaut.
{ http://www.karmanaut.com | http://www.planet-earth.org
    http://www.MacWeb3D.org | http://sydney.siggraph.org.au }
Hypermedia, virtual worlds, human interface, truth, beauty.