Wired News: Battling the Copyright Big Boys

While the $7,000 the group raised is a drop in the bucket compared with the entertainment industry's hefty coffers, IPac is encouraged by the interest it has generated in a short period of time. Over 500 people have signed on to support its mission.

"This was sort of a trial run to see if people will actually support candidates based on their intellectual-property policies, and they did," said Jason Schultz, an IPac volunteer. "We really felt there was a community out there that we could engage specifically on IP."

Alpert said IPac will research the records of legislators in Congress, provide people with information on how their legislators have voted, identify worthy candidates and help them with money and volunteers.

"I strongly support the effort IPac is making. It is important that a greater focus be brought to the need to balance the rights of copyright owners with the rights of the users," said Boucher, co-sponsor of the Digital Media Consumers' Rights Act (HR107), which would permit circumvention of digital locks on copyright content for non-infringing uses.

"The 1998 (Digital Millennium Copyright Act) makes it possible for creators of digital content to completely abolish fair-use rights with respect to that media," Boucher said. "The bill that I introduced ... would confirm fair-use rights for the digital era."

Boucher and his co-sponsor, Doolittle, are still in the process of collecting support to move the bill forward.

Boucher said that even though Hollywood and the record labels still have a lot of influence in Washington, consumers have gained ground since 1998. Now that the technology companies -- which believe tighter copy controls can chill innovation -- are aligned with consumer groups, there is a stronger presence for the public interest.

Go consumers! Go Boucher and Doolittle!

As we wrap up America's festival of social capital, Thanksgiving, we also follow the annual tradition of watching America's greatest cultural celebration of social capital, It's a Wonderful Life.

This film is also one of the best examples of the value of the public domain; a relative flop at the box office, it languished in obscurity for decades before being reintroduced by PBS stations in the 1970s precisely because its copyright had expired and was therefore free to show (Ebert). Had today's laws been in effect in 1946 when Capra made the film, it would have stayed unknown until at least 2061 (70 years after Capra's death in 1991). How many other films like It's a Wonderful Life may never be shown and even be lost forever?

(P.S.: sadly, It's a Wonderful Life is probably still under copyright, after all.)

link:

Kahle and his allies contended that Congress' lengthening of copyright-protection terms--even when an author's work didn't request further protection--had radically transformed traditional copyright law. They asked the courts to rule that much of this recent copyright law change was illegal, which potentially could have opened up large amounts of books, movies and music created in the 1960s and 1970s to public domain use.

In a decision made available Wednesday, federal Judge Maxine Chesney concluded that Congress did have substantial flexibility in expanding copyright protections without court interference.

The courts have deferred to Congress on this one, it's pretty clear. It's not right, but we're going to have to go the legislative route to make sure that free culture prevails.

link:

"The movie industry is following the path paved by the music business, filing hundreds of lawsuits against consumers who enjoy their products so much that they want to share them with friends. Instead of adapting to the new rules of the road, these companies wield a legal sledgehammer to bash their best potential customers. (Interestingly, book publishers don't sue public libraries. They learned long ago that their challenge was to make the paid product more attractive and convenient than the free one.)

'Suing your customers is not a winning business strategy,' writes G. Richard Shell, a legal studies professor at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton business school. He notes that a century ago, when Henry Ford started selling cheap cars off his revolutionary assembly line, the country's leading carmakers responded by suing hundreds of customers who bought the Ford product. The suits claimed that buying a Ford violated a patent that the other automakers had on internal combustion engines.

For eight years, the big companies sued Ford and his customers. By the end of the war, Ford had won in court and, far more important, in the hearts and wallets of the public. Ford became the country's top carmaker."

What is going on such that industries are so risk averse as to refuse to allow innovation? Most technological innovations tend to increase the market for content.

nosoftwarepatents.com - Interesting site. I'm not sure if the politics surrounding the regulatory environment in Europe are comparable to those here, but it does seem like this fight is global in nature.

From the Washington Post:

The usual litany of fears are trotted out.

Among Monday's petitioners siding with the entertainment companies were the Association of American Publishers, Screen Actors Guild, Recording Artists Coalition, National Basketball Association and the commissioner of Major League Baseball, Marks said.

The sports leagues contend that if the court does not weigh in on file-sharing, programming that they license could wind up being disseminated online without their permission, sapping sales.

A watermarking system with payment via the amount of content downloaded could ensure that sales are not sapped through downloading.

In all, 41 state attorneys general also submitted briefs. They argued file-sharing programs pose risks to consumers, such as identity theft and being unwittingly exposed to spyware and child pornography, Marks said.

I wonder if there are any other risks that file sharing poses. What about cancer or diabetes? What about losing a sock in the wash?

This doomsday stuff is really out of hand. Nearly every innovation in content creation and distribution has contributed to a radically larger market for creative content and distribution. To be sure, the winners and losers won't always be the same, but come on - it's not like you can replace the Red Sox.

Five of the six candidates endorsed by IPac succeeded in winning their elections on Tuesday, November 2. All of them will tirelessly work for the public interest in Congress. However, bills like INDUCE will return during the next session of Congress and there will be big fights ahead. Sign on to IPac's principles to show Congress you support balanced copyright and patent policy and to keep informed about new developments in the fight.