[LINK] Digital copyright: it's all wrong

David Boxall david.boxall at hunterlink.net.au
Tue Jun 10 11:39:54 AEST 2008

Link to the WikiLeaks page, as provided by Jeremy Malcolm on 24/05/2008:

I sent that to a young relative.  His response:
"Yep - there will always be a grumpy old man sitting on his porch with 
the loaded shotgun, threatening passers by."
The current generation definitely isn't convinced.  Draconian 
legislation serves only to promote disrespect of law in general.

To me, Intellectual Property is fraud.  What it refers to isn't 
property, but privilege.  Privilege enshrined in law perhaps, but 
nothing more than privilege.  Infringing privilege is not theft.  Where 
law bestows excessive privilege, civil disobedience is justified.

So: the P in IP could stand for Privilege, but what about the I?  
Intolerable, perhaps, or Improbable?

I recently took delivery of a Beyonwiz PVR.  Not a device I'd recommend 
to anyone without a bit of technical nous, but otherwise lots of fun on 
a rainy weekend.  The thing has a 200GB hard disk, two high definition 
digital tuners and an Ethernet port.  I can easily copy razor-sharp 
digital recordings to any machine on my home network and (once I figure 
out how to handle .ts files) potentially burn them to DVD or just retain 
them indefinitely.  Total hard disk space on the network exceeds a 
terabyte, so the latter is feasible though unlikely.  In this 
environment; what price copyright?

What changes would restore credibility to copyright?

David Boxall                    |  All that is required
                                |  for evil to prevail is
                                |  for good men to do nothing.
                                |     -- Edmund Burke (1729-1797)

stephen at melbpc.org.au wrote:
> Digital copyright: it's all wrong
> Graeme Philipson June 10, 2008
> http://www.smh.com.au/news/perspectives/digital-copyright-its-all-wrong/2008/06/09/1212863545123.html
> A draft treaty proposes draconian measures to protect copyright.
> <snip>
> Fortunately they are on the wrong side of history. When the full details 
> and consequences of this treaty become widely known, I believe the effect 
> will be the opposite of what its authors intend. It contains so little 
> understanding of the way the digital world works that the backlash against 
> it will be massive, accelerating the inevitable death of the out-of-date 
> business models it is vainly trying to protect.
> graeme at philipson.info

More information about the Link mailing list