| News | Features | Interviews |
| Blog | Contact | Editorials |
| How the US Pressured Spain to Adopt Web Blocking Law |
| By Thom Holwerda on 2012-01-06 09:26:40 |
| "Though a deeply divided Congress is currently considering Internet website censorship legislation, the US has no such official policy - not even for child porn, which is voluntarily blocked by some ISPs. Nor does the US have a government-backed 'three strikes' or 'graduated response' system of escalating warnings to particular users accused of downloading music and movies from file-sharing networks. Yet here was the ultimatum that the US Embassy in Madrid gave the Spanish government in February 2008: adopt such measures or we will punish you. Thanks to WikiLeaks, we have the text of the diplomatic cable announcing the pressure tactics." Isn't it funny that one of the main driving forces behind the push for more stringent copyright laws, Disney, has built its empire almost entirely on appropriating European public domain stories? As a European, that's just insulting. |
|
| I don't want to live on this planet any more |
| By Laurence on 2012-01-06 09:52:22 |
| http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3... |
 - Score: 7 |
| It's called empire |
| By Hypnos on 2012-01-06 12:48:12 |
| You know sh*t's getting real when Ron Paul and Noam Chomsky are converging. |
| - Score: 3 |
| As an American, |
| By tidux on 2012-01-06 15:45:49 |
| it's pretty instulting to us, too. There's no logical reason for anything made before 1972, if not 1992, to still be eligible for copyright. They keep shoving this on the rest of the world, and then using the "harmonization" pressure tactic to convince Congress to go along with it. Why don't you guys just stand up for yourselves once in a while? It'd save us copyright-reformers here a lot of work if we didn't have to worry about the next ACTA showing up every five years. |
| - Score: 3 |
| RE: As an American, |
| By Cody Evans on 2012-01-06 16:05:30 |
| Forget 1972, all works before 1923 are under copyright protection until at least 2047, barring yet another copyright extension... |
| - Score: 6 |
| RE[2]: As an American, |
| By Alfman on 2012-01-06 17:38:03 |
|
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cop... The term is about 100 years according to the graph, which makes assumptions about the author's lifespan. It shows very nicely how the term has been continuously extended to keep modern works perpetually out of the public domain. What gets me is retro-active extensions, since it is obviously true that the prior copyright terms were already sufficient motivation for those works to be created. If extensions are needed for future work, then so be it (although I haven't seen anyone make a case for this either), but the whole motivation to extend copyright appears to be greed rather than public interests. http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/... Mary Bono, speaking of the late Sonny Bono's copyright act at the house of representatives. "Actually, Sonny wanted the term of copy-right protection to last forever. I am informed by staff that such a change would violate the Constitution. I invite all of you to work with me to strengthen our copyright laws in all of the ways available to us. As you know, there is also Jack Valenti’s proposal for term to last forever less one day. Perhaps the Committee may look at that next Congress" |
| - Score: 6 |
| Priming the pump? |
| By smilie on 2012-01-06 18:47:07 |
| Pushing foreign countries to adopt IP laws that wouldn't pass the muster in the US could be a tactic to bring them in to the US under the guise of "normalizing" international IP laws. |
| - Score: 6 |
| RE: Priming the pump? |
| By tylerdurden on 2012-01-06 20:30:18 |
| *ahem* SOPA *ahem* |
| - Score: 2 |
| Nice comment |
| By eantoranz on 2012-01-06 20:45:12 |
| Dude, Thom, that side comment about Disney is quite a jewel. |
| - Score: 9 |
| Comment by Darkmage |
| By Darkmage on 2012-01-06 21:54:56 |
| Surely, SURELY, Mary Bono's own words should be taken into a court somewhere and be used to strike down the legislation as unconstitutional? What the hell ever happenned to the spirit of the original document? It's quite clear that big companies, and government are acting against the original intent of the constitution on these matters. |
| - Score: 2 |
| RE: Comment by Darkmage |
| By tylerdurden on 2012-01-06 22:58:34 |
| To get back to the "original intent" of the US constitution, you are gonna have to strip women, minorities, and non-land owning white males of their rights. Which is going to be awkwaaaaaaaaard... |
| - Score: 1 |
| News | Features | Interviews |
| Blog | Contact | Editorials |