Jim Lebans, a producer with CBC Radio’s Quirks and Quarks, looks at the tangled world of intellectual property and how the digital age is challenging ideas about who owns our culture.
Interesting note from the band's website.
The USA doesn't fully recognize moral rights, so there may be no legal case in the USA. In Canada, things might be different, so politicians should take note. According to the Creative Commons Canada Moral Rights FAQ:
Last Saturday, independent MP Blair Wilson announced that he will be sitting as a member of the Green Party of Canada. This is historic as it is the first Green Party member in a federal legislature in one of those few countries still using the First Past the Post voting system.
The Green Party will be taken more seriously because they have as many seats as the Reform party did prior to the 1993 election. Prior to that election their only sitting member was Deborah Grey who won in a 1989 by-election. During this election the Reform party won 52 seats.
With this in mind, people have been asking to hear more about their positions on copyright and related issues.
A submission has been made to the W3C to introduce the Creative Commons Rights Expression Language (ccREL). This compliments a number of other projects they are involved in to help create standards around Rights Expression (IE: digitally encoded license agreements) which are fundamental to the technical side of what in Copyright is called "Rights Management Information".
See also: RFC4946 - Atom License Extension
An article by Joseph Menn, a Los Angeles Times Staff Writer, focused on whether Mickey Mouse was in the public domain. The broader, and I think more important policy issue this debate brings forward, is why we are continuing to use such extremely complex formula for determining when human creativity finally becomes recyclable (copyright term expires).
According to a Wired article by David Kravets, a federal judge on Wednesday said copyright owners must consider "fair use" of their works before sending takedown notices to online video-sharing sites.
This is also yet another reminder that you cannot automate copyright issues in software. What is and is not permissible under copyright is something that requires human thinking about things such as fair use, and not something which can be objectively written into computer software. In a rational society this would kill attempts to force ISPs to install filters given there is no way the filter can be accurate.
There is an interesting article by Gale Holland in the Los Angeles Times talking about the "eye-popping costs" of college and university textbooks. Caltech economics professor R. Preston McAfee offers a solution, which is to create textbooks that can be freely distributed given the bulk of these costs come from copyright costs and the costs of largely unnecessary intermediaries. McAfee "finds it annoying that students and faculty haven't looked harder for alternatives to the exorbitant prices".
Read the rest of this entry on IT World Canada's blog »
Article linked by Gavin Baker
Today's globe and mail has an editorial on Bill C-61 which is critical of the bill, but not nearly critical enough. Here is the reply I sent to the editor. I could have said much much more, but the likelihood of being printed and the length of the submission has a very strong inverse relationship.
For anyone who is not already following it, they should be following commercial litigator and internet law attorney Ray Beckerman's "Recording Industry vs The People" blog. This is where you can following the cases which the recording industry is increasingly losing due to their (and those they hire) questionable investigatory techniques and legal theories. It has been interesting to watch US cases turn the same way as the only Canadian case did: lost due to lack of evidence of infringing activity.
Other key sites