The case for copyright reform

 Rick Falkvinge and Christian Engström wrote “The Case for Copyright Reform” in 2012, which sets out the case for a modern-day copyright regime. In this week's blog, I'll share my reflections on Chapter 2 of their book.


The authors in this chapter wrote about six points and I will describe and talk about each of them.

 • Moral Rights Unchanged

We propose no changes at all to the moral right of the author to be recognized as the author. Nobody should be allowed to claim that they are ABBA, or have written all of Paul McCartney’s songs unless they actually are or have. To the extent that this is a real-world problem, it should still be illegal to do so. ”Give credit where credit is due” is a good maxim that everybody agrees with.

Everyone should own their property and be able to do what they want with it.


• Free Non-Commercial Sharing 

The writers want to put copyright back to its roots and make it crystal clear that it only applies to industrial copying. If achieved by private people without a commercial motive, distributing copies, or otherwise spreading or making use of someone else's copyrighted material, should never be banned. Peer-to-peer file sharing is an example of potentially legitimate practice.


• 20 Years Of Commercial Monopoly

The authors want to shorten the protection time to something that is reasonable from both society’s and an investor’s point of view, and propose 20 years from publication. 


• Registration After 5 Years

Copyright protection should be given automatically like it is today to newly published works, but rights owners who want to continue to exercise their commercial exclusivity of a work beyond the first 5 years after publication should be required to register the right, in such a way that it can be found by a diligent search of public rights databases. This will solve the orphan works problem.


• Free Sampling 

The authors want to change this by introducing clear exceptions and limitations to allow remixes and parodies, as well as quotation rights for sound and audiovisual material modeled after the quotation rights that already exist for text. 


• A Ban on DRM

It must always be legal to circumvent DRM restrictions, and we should consider introducing a ban in the consumer rights legislation on DRM technologies that restrict legal uses of a work. There is no point in having our parliaments introduce a balanced and reasonable copyright legislation, if at the same time we allow the big multinational corporations to write their own laws, and enforce them through technical means.


All and all, we all know the copyright restrictions are too harsh and they are only getting worse each year, thankfully I think we have it better in Europe, in the USA you can go to prison if you use copyright material. There is such thing as fair use and the definition that needs to be better and more friendly. 

This article strides to make copyright better and I fully support it

Komentarji

Priljubljene objave iz tega spletnega dnevnika

Pre-history

How do blind people use a computer?

Cencorship & Privacy