[d@DCC] Re: [Fwd: Re: !@!Re: PG Canada]
darryl at mfe.ca
Tue Nov 9 10:10:21 EST 2004
Russell McOrmond wrote:
> Curious -- should be be discussing this in the main mailing list, as a way
> to encourage more people to join? If so, reply to this mesage (in its
> entirety) to the list.
> On Mon, 8 Nov 2004, Darryl Moore wrote:
>>I agree absolutely. The question of liability comes down to how much
>>effort we need to take to actively prevent people outside the country
>>from accessing it. This is a huuuuuge gray area. I think a good argument
>>could be made for none at all. But then again..... look at IcraveTV.com
> Part of the question relates to "is the Internet a broadcast medium". I
> know the answer is NO, but parliament does not. The rules used to
> regulate broadcast are nothing like the rules that would make sense to
> regulate citizen-to-citizen communications.
> There is nothing preventing someone from the US coming up to Canada and
> buying a book that was a reprint of something in the public domain. Just
> because the Internet makes this easier shouldn't change anything.
I agree with you completely, and I think this will be the core of the
argument that will have to be made. This kind of initiative will force
that debate to happen, and to happen in public.
> Having a membership form that asks people what country they live in
> would be interesting. This way we could also help people outside the US
> understand what is wrong with their laws by denying access to those who
> were honest when they said they were from a less-free country.
Frankly I think a simple disclaimer stating that the web content is
intended for Canadian consumption and all others should consult their
local laws should be sufficient, but what do I know.
> Could also be interesting to get techies involved in encoding these
> documents in some Digital Rigths Encoding (DRE) that would clarify this
> type of thing. The assumption of far too many DRE is that it only encodes
> the rights of copyright holders, not the rights of society, so the date of
> death of the first holder of copyright doesn't get adequately encoded.
> The date of first publish needed for corporate copyright tends to be,
> although I don't see this clarified in the Canadian act what the term for
> corporations are for other than photography.
What if the authors not dead when you publish it? Also, not only would
you have to encode the date of the authors death, but you would have to
create some sort of reference for the DRM to properly implement the host
countries copyright laws. This sounds very onerous.
Discuss mailing list
Discuss at list.digital-copyright.ca
More information about the Discuss