[d@DCC] Forming a more formal "interest group".

[Russell McOrmond]

On Tue, 13 Apr 2004, Neil Leyton wrote:

> Everything you wrote I would second. Also, as I see us aligning 
> ourselves pretty evenly with the "Balanced Copyright Coalition", we may 
> want to find out more about them... a weird group: PIAC, CAIP, CAB, 
> CATA, CCTA, Retail Council of canada, Bell Canada, TELUS, and Howard 
> Knopf. Whodat?

  I am wondering if anyone has the time to try to contact this group and
its members and try to get a clarification that their support for TPMs as
a way to "protect" works does not mean a support for Legal protection for
TPM/RMI.

  As their statement was worded it made this critical point vague.


  Same issue as I expressed in "An open letter to the to Canadian
Coalition for Fair Digital Access (CCFDA)" which is a group that opposed 
the private copying levy.  We should be trying to make connections with 
them as well.

http://www.itbusiness.ca/index.asp?theaction=61&sid=50984


  To me, our priority #1 should always remain an opposition to legal
protection for TPM/RMI/DRM as no other reforms matter if this 
*replacement* to copyright is created where the policy is not set by 
parliaments but by monopoly software vendors and media companies.

-- 
 Russell McOrmond, Internet Consultant: <http://www.flora.ca/> 
 "Make it legal: don't litigate, use creative licensing" campaign.
 A modern answer to P2P: http://www.flora.ca/makelegal200403.shtml
 Canadian File-sharing Legal Information Network http://www.canfli.org/

--
For (un)subscription information, posting guidelines and
links to other related sites please see http://www.digital-copyright.ca