[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Copyright Bill to Kill Tech
- To: <liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu>
- Subject: Copyright Bill to Kill Tech
- From: Alix <abuffonvance@verizon.net>
- Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2004 19:33:12 EDT
- Reply-to: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
- Sender: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
Further reading to follow Chuck Hamaker's posting ... Regarding the Hatch Bill S. 2560, Marybeth Peters, the Register of Copyrights, advocates placing further restrictions on consumer "fair use" rights (as codified by Sony v. Universal): "To achieve a more comprehensive solution, this Committee may want to consider other legislative approaches in addition to this bill that would provide guidance to courts so that liability can be found in appropriate circumstances. While you have carefully crafted this bill to preserve the 20-year-old decision in the Sony case, it may become necessary to consider whether that decision is overly protective of manufacturers and marketers of infringement tools, especially in today�s digital environment." Links to testimony from last Thursday's (7/22/2004) hearings: http://judiciary.senate.gov/testimony.cfm?id=1276&wit_id=307 http://judiciary.senate.gov/hearing.cfm?id=1276 By contrast, HR 107, the Digital Media Consumers' Rights Act of 2003, is defended in Dr. Mark Cooper's Opinion piece in the Kansas City Star. As per the summary of this bill (opinion piece and bill summary below), HR 107 would seek to: -- Amend Federal copyright law to exempt from its prohibitions against circumvention of copyright protection systems any persons acting solely in furtherance of scientific research into technological protection measures. -- Declare it not a violation of copyright law, but fair use, to: (1) circumvent a technological measure in connection with access to, or the use of, a work if such circumvention does not result in an infringement of the copyright in the work; or (2) manufacture, distribute, or make noninfringing use of a hardware or software product capable of enabling significant noninfringing use of a copyrighted work. http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/business/9193806.htm?1c http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d108:HR00107:@@@L&summ2=m&) Alix Buffon Vance Ebook Library - North America 301-951-8108 -----Original Message----- Sent: Friday, July 23, 2004 12:42 PM Subject: Copyright Bill to Kill Tech? By Katie Dean, Wired.com, Jul. 22, 2004 http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,64297,00.html/wn_ascii "The Senate Judiciary Committee will consider a bill Thursday that would hold technology companies liable for any product they make that encourages people to steal copyright materials." Antipiracy bill gains new ally By Declan McCullagh, CNET News.com, July 21, 2004 http://news.com.com/2100-1027_3-5278980.html "In a move that's alarming technology firms, the U.S. Copyright Office is about to endorse new legislation that would outlaw peer-to-peer networks and possibly some consumer electronics devices that could be used for copyright piracy." For a consumer rights lesson, hit rewind on the VCR By MARK COOPER, Kansas City Star, http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/business/9193806.htm?1c "For each step forward consumers want to take in the way we use technology, the folks who sell us movies and music want to force us to take two steps back." From: digital-copyright Digest 23 Jul 2004 15:00:00 -0000 Issue 400 Chuck Hamaker
- Prev by Date: RE: Thoughts on the House of Commons report (Chesler)
- Next by Date: UK Inquiry: PLoS response
- Previous by thread: RE: Thoughts on the House of Commons report (Chesler)
- Next by thread: UK Inquiry: PLoS response
- Index(es):