Hi Szemir, Thanks for you input.
I need to put together a bit of a position paper for myself prior to meeting with Kempton and later Jason. As I will only be representing myself I will centre my arguments around my (in)ability to use purchased media for their apparent purpose. Specifically I want to address and preserve my ability to transcode from CD to MP3 and from DVD to AVI/MPEG. I want to preserve my ability to listen to that transcoded media on my iPod, or any subsequent device that I build or purchase. I don't want to have to buy the music all over again for every device. Similar arguments apply to the DVDs I've purchased. It's nice to be able to rip a DVD and watch it on our EEEPC while flying. The EEEPC doesn't have a CD/DVD drive and I don't want to have to drag along a full-size laptop just for that drive. Besides, when the guy ahead of you reclines his seat you can't open a full size laptop anyway. The issue of (lack of) artist compensation is legitimate but I am not the right person to argue that because I'm not a stake holder in that relationship. Cheers, J.J. On Fri, 2008-10-24 at 21:54 -0600, bogi wrote: > Since this was way too short a notice, I can only hope for the best. Setups > like this (copy protection) have failed several times in the last 3 decades > or so. They where introduced, had great penalties attached to them , and > enforced to the hilt only to be dropped and abandoned by its initial > instigators as a failure. A voluntary payment system, like with the CC seems > to provide a far better alternative. A law that needs to have exceptions on > allmost all its sections for law enforcemet, secret service and public > libraries is a bad law that obviously does not serve the public intrest. > the idea behind copyright law was to protect the book publishers investment > against other unscrupulous publishers. It was never meant to intrude on how > the end user used, shared talked about made variant of the original material. > That was all tucked under a wide cover called fair use. Bill C61 and i am > sure we will see the next version soon, obliterates this fair use protection > completely. it goes on meticulously enumerating how and nuder what > circumstances can the user make one copy for themselves, and that they can > only do that if the un-circumventable copy protection was not implemented. > And would stipulate giving away a media or a media player with some media on > it a punishable big time. (this would make throwing away your disks a major > offense btw...) > A simple make your product available for use, including fair use, a > reasonable > price setting and the willing to understand that in today's word , the the > ramp for publishing to the mass media has been lowered significantly, and a > controlled attribution system might be far more appropriate than a clobber / > punish approach. > > Copy protection by the way, fails because it turns out that it actually > punishes the (legitimate) end user and the so protected dmca / drm , and > there are allready examples of this happening in the US a few times. > > On a side not: protecting the publishers rights here does not translate to > protecting the artist. Most of the publishing companies have contracts with > their artists that deprives the artists from any on line revenue or does not > include that revenue source. It is hypocritical to call the artists intrest > into play, they benefit nothing from this, as a side note: what do you think > the dispute between the show writers and (Industry) was when the writers went > on strike for a few month last year ?? > > Well , i guess i was quite long winded here. > Cheers > Szemir > > On October 24, 2008 16:40, John Jardine wrote: > > I know this is short notice but I have a meeting with Jason Kenney > > tomorrow regarding what was bill C61. > > > > If there are any other people that live in his riding that would like to > > speak with him on this issue please let me know so I can co-ordinate it > > with Kempton Lam of Fair Copyright for Canada. > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > clug-talk mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://clug.ca/mailman/listinfo/clug-talk_clug.ca > > Mailing List Guidelines (http://clug.ca/ml_guidelines.php) > > **Please remove these lines when replying _______________________________________________ clug-talk mailing list [email protected] http://clug.ca/mailman/listinfo/clug-talk_clug.ca Mailing List Guidelines (http://clug.ca/ml_guidelines.php) **Please remove these lines when replying
