[politics] Re: [d@DCC] Senate Bill S-9

[Russell McOrmond]

On Mon, 1 Nov 2004, Ian! D. Allen wrote:

> It's a muddy mess who should get first "copyright", if you ask me.

  I think we have fallen prey to the trap of confusing copyright with
access.


  Copyright should be a bargain that is by definition limited in scope and
time(1) to encourage and reward creativity.  It is an entirely
inappropriate tool for gaining access to something, restricting access to
secrets, protecting privacy, or other such issues.


  What the commissioner really needs is not to receive copyright, but to
receive a more balanced bargain where the term expires long before the
excessive life+ that the copyright holder currently enjoys.  We are
talking about works that don't have commercial value to the creator, but
have personal and historical/archival value to the subject, their heirs,
and society as a whole.

  I agree with the problems that Wallace brings up, but where he wants to
tinker with "who gets copyright" to attempt to solve larger scope+time
problems, I believe we need to focus our energies on the source of the
problem.  He claims that Berne and other such conventions/treaties are
permanent and unfixable, while we know this to be false as our political
opponents (intermediaries and other non-creator copyright holders) have
been able to abuse WIPO and other such organizations to radically alter
the bargain in their favor.


  We need to see each one of these issues as a justification to reduce the
term of copyright.  We live in a modern world where creativity is far more
distributable and the old-world monopolies are stifling and not
encouraging creativity.  We shouldn't be attacking photographers creative
rights, but attacking what I see to be lunatic thieves like Sir Cliff
Richard who, after receiving benefit from an already excessive copyright
term, wants to *STEAL* from the public domain by reneging on his part of
that bargain.

  When you take a loan out from the bank and not repay it when it is due,
this is known as criminal behavior.  This is no different than the case
in copyright where a creator tries to extend the term of copyright after
they received benefit from our end of the bargain.


Note 1) - with the reduction of these limits recognized as grand theft,
not just the deminimus theft known as infringement.

-- 
 Russell McOrmond, Internet Consultant: <http://www.flora.ca/> 
 Code is Law: how software code regulates the activities of citizens,
 and acts similar to law.  How do we ensure transparency/accountability?  
 http://www.flora.ca/russell/drafts/life-of-hacker.html#code=law
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
Discuss at list.digital-copyright.ca
http://list.digital-copyright.ca/mailman/listinfo/discuss