So, is this the privatization of approval? We do seem to have swapped from having got rid of the *PostMaster General*and the * Lord Chamberlain* to having *Record Company Executives *decide what's*good for us. *
On 24 June 2010 14:25, David Tomlinson <[email protected]> wrote: > Did I mention copyright can be bad for you... > > American University document > http://www.wcl.american.edu/pijip/go/acta-communique > > "FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS > > ACTA would authorize or encourage private and government enforcement > measures that would: > > * curtail enjoyment of fundamental rights and liberties, including > domestic and internationally protected human rights to health, privacy and > the protection of personal data, free expression, education, cultural > participation, and right to a fair legal process, including fair trial and > presumptions of innocence. > > THE INTERNET > > ACTA would > > * Encourage internet service providers to police the activities of > internet users by holding internet providers responsible for the actions of > subscribers, conditioning safe harbors on adopting policing policies, and by > requiring parties to encourage cooperation between service providers and > rights holders; > > * Encourage this surveillance, and the potential for punitive > disconnections by private actors, without adequate court oversight or due > process; > > * Globalize 'anti-circumvention' provisions which threaten innovation, > competition, free (freedom-respecting) software, open access business > models, interoperability, the enjoyment of user rights, and user choice; > > SCOPE AND NATURE OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW > > ACTA would distort fundamental balances between the rights and interests of > proprietors and users, including by > > * introducing highly specific rights and remedies for rights holders > without detailing correlative exceptions, limitations, and procedural > safeguards for users; > > * shifting enforcement burdens to public authorities and private > intermediaries in ways that are likely to be more sensitive to proprietary > concerns; > > * requiring formula-driven assessment of damages, potentially unrelated > to any proven harm or gain; > > * omitting strong disincentives to abuse of enforcement processes by > right holders; > > * including rigid injunction, damages and heightened civil and criminal > enforcement requirements that will restrict government flexibility, impede > innovation and slow the development and diffusion of green technology; > > * threaten the continuation or development of innovative public > intererst exceptions, such as common law approaches to permitting copies of > works by "authorization."" > > Remind you of any UK laws or proposals ? > > > - > Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please > visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. > Unofficial list archive: > http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ > -- Brian Butterworth follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/briantist web: http://www.ukfree.tv - independent digital television and switchover advice, since 2002
