From syn2cat -
Jump to: navigation, search


One topic which struck me while reading the documents provided by Steve: circumventing copy protection is illegal. Is this really true in Luxembourg? Seriously WTF?

Well call me Shelly!
Article 6 of the Directive provides protection for "technological measures", any technology device or component which is designed to restrict or prevent certain acts which are not authorised by the rightholder. Member States must provide "adequate legal protection", which may be civil, criminal or a mix of the two. Technological measures are only protected if they are "effective", which means not when they actually work but when they have been successfully implemented. A simple password is thus "effective" irrespective of the ease with which it may be cracked. Rightholders who use such anti-circumvention measures must allow reproduction which is permitted under the limitations to copyright protection [Art. 6(4)]. Digital rights management information is similarly protected (Art. 7).
Unlike Section 1201 of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, which only prohibits circumvention of access control measures, InfoSoc Directive also prohibits circumvention of copy protection measures, making it potentially more restrictive. In both DMCA and InfoSoc Directive, production, distribution etc. of equipment used to circumvent both access and copy-protection is prohibited. Under DMCA, a potential user who wants to avail herself of an alleged fair use privilege to crack copy protection (which is not prohibited) would have to do it herself since no equipment would lawfully be marketed for that purpose. Under InfoSoc Directive, this possibility would not be available since circumvention of copy protection is illegal.[6]

Voices to get:

  • maybe:

Voices so far:

  • Marc Gerard freelance Photograph
  • Yves Stephany independent Musician
  • Luxorr (contacted via E-Mail --SteveClement 19:11, 4 November 2009 (UTC))
  • (contacted via WebForm --SteveClement 19:00, 4 November 2009 (UTC))
  • Various Rekult Artists - head: Ralf Zeimet


Sources: (initial) (amendments) (World Intellectual Property Organisation)

More thoughts:

ways out?

P2P - not an option -> doesn't instrinsically allow discovery

Portal - pay for service of editorial staff <-> isn't this what the music industry does?

use content as springboard for other goods and services - ok but we are not just dealing with entertainment

fat times are over, let the market decide who survives - danger of loss of diversity?

status quo?

criminalize most people -> restore status quo through fear

flatrate - who gets a share, copyright is automatic* also, we are not dealing with just art/entertainment statistics are difficult

publishing industries trump on quality/diversity

- Publishing Industry stops being golden cow (more expenses) but continues to exist

Who benefits from copyright?

entertainment industry publishing business authors/artists? verwertungsgesellschaften



the cost of publishing, editing, production has gone down prosecution of copyright offenders impossible

culture moves at a faster rate
could say: locked down that they are not part of culture

Bastard Pop aka. Mashup's - Famous: Danger Mouse -

[edit] The Raw Stuff

There are no threads on this page yet.
Personal tools