Support |
On 14 apr 2007, at 21.04, samba - wrote: > BoingBoing: > > Public hearing on Broadcast Treaty in DC, May 9 > The US Patent and Trademark Office is holding public hearings on > May 9 to discuss the US position on the WIPO Broadcast Treaty -- > you can attend and even speak. > > The Broadcast Treaty is a proposal to let broadcasters (and > "webcasters" -- people who host files and make them available to > the Internet) claim a copyright to the stuff that they transmit. > Broadcasters get this special right even if the stuff they're > sending around is in the public domain, or Creative Commons > licensed, or not copyrightable (like CSPAN's broadcasts of > Congress). Fair use doesn't apply to this right. > > What this means is that a handful of corporations are going to be > able to claim copyrights over billions of works they didn't create > -- works that they've done nothing to improve, works they've done > nothing for except electromagnetically modulating them. > > What this means is that these corporations are going to be able to > trump the rights of actual creators. If you put a Creative Commons > license on your video that allows your fans to share it, the > "broadcaster" -- or the person who transmits it over the Web -- can > override your wishes and tell your fans that they can't. > > This is a proposed UN treaty, and the US position on it keeps > wavering. The tech sector recently woke up and told the government > off for selling them out in Geneva, critically wounding the > Treaty's prospects. With a little help, it could die altogether. Holy Shit! I could never have imagined that coming up... I know about, and think it makes sense, when the author "sells" the copyright of media music especially designed for a certain tv show, advertisement spot etc, but this new treaty seems just crazy! Attempted robbery. Greetings from Sweden Per Boysen www.boysen.se (Swedish) www.looproom.com (international) http://tinyurl.com/fauvm (podcast) http://tinyurl.com/2kek7h (CC donationware music releases)