P2P-Zone - View Single Post

JackSpratts · 16-10-02, 09:48 PM

By Declan McCullagh
Special to ZDNet

The debate over digital copyright finally is returning to the nation's capital-- and it's about time.

Last week, the Supreme Court kicked off its fall term by hearing a challenge to a law that extends the duration of all U.S. copyrights for 20 years.

James Rogan, Commerce Department undersecretary for intellectual property, will give a talk with the dead-giveaway title of "Reaffirming Intellectual Property Rights in an Information Age." Also this week, the Association Internationale pour la Protection de la Propriété Intellectuelle (AIPPI), devoted to promoting "the protection of intellectual property," is holding a two-day conference in Washington.

Copyright is anything but a novel topic for Washington's politicos. After all, the first copyright law was enacted in 1790, with major revisions coming in 1831, 1870, 1909 and 1976. Then came the No Electronic Theft Act (1997), the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (1998) and the Copyright Term Extension Act (1998).

Each of the three measures takes a different approach, but they have two things in common: First, they're designed to crack down on illicit copying through the Internet. Second, they wormed their way through Congress with scant opposition and often with unanimous votes.

Both sides of the debate are unhappy with this state of affairs. The copyright expansionists, led by the entertainment industry, want more laws and more power for holders. Lobbyists for the motion picture studios and the record labels are behind two important bills: The Consumer Broadband and Digital Television Promotion Act, which would forcibly implant copy-protection technology in electronic devices, and a peer-to-peer hacking bill, sponsored by Rep. Howard Berman, D-Calif.

The copyright reductionists, on the other hand, want their opponents to have fewer laws and far less power. Besides the Supreme Court case, they're pinning their hopes on a pair of newly-introduced "fair use" proposals introduced by Reps. Rick Boucher, D-Va., and Zoe Lofgren, D-Calif., that would make it legal to bypass copyright-protection mechanisms.
http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1107-961899.html

- js.

16-10-02, 09:48 PM	#1
JackSpratts Join Date: May 2001 Location: New England Posts: 10,023	It's Time to Fix Copyrights Permanently - Commentary By Declan McCullagh Special to ZDNet The debate over digital copyright finally is returning to the nation's capital-- and it's about time. Last week, the Supreme Court kicked off its fall term by hearing a challenge to a law that extends the duration of all U.S. copyrights for 20 years. James Rogan, Commerce Department undersecretary for intellectual property, will give a talk with the dead-giveaway title of "Reaffirming Intellectual Property Rights in an Information Age." Also this week, the Association Internationale pour la Protection de la Propriété Intellectuelle (AIPPI), devoted to promoting "the protection of intellectual property," is holding a two-day conference in Washington. Copyright is anything but a novel topic for Washington's politicos. After all, the first copyright law was enacted in 1790, with major revisions coming in 1831, 1870, 1909 and 1976. Then came the No Electronic Theft Act (1997), the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (1998) and the Copyright Term Extension Act (1998). Each of the three measures takes a different approach, but they have two things in common: First, they're designed to crack down on illicit copying through the Internet. Second, they wormed their way through Congress with scant opposition and often with unanimous votes. Both sides of the debate are unhappy with this state of affairs. The copyright expansionists, led by the entertainment industry, want more laws and more power for holders. Lobbyists for the motion picture studios and the record labels are behind two important bills: The Consumer Broadband and Digital Television Promotion Act, which would forcibly implant copy-protection technology in electronic devices, and a peer-to-peer hacking bill, sponsored by Rep. Howard Berman, D-Calif. The copyright reductionists, on the other hand, want their opponents to have fewer laws and far less power. Besides the Supreme Court case, they're pinning their hopes on a pair of newly-introduced "fair use" proposals introduced by Reps. Rick Boucher, D-Va., and Zoe Lofgren, D-Calif., that would make it legal to bypass copyright-protection mechanisms. http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1107-961899.html - js.