EU Copyright Reform Art 11&13

22. March, 2019

The reform in the current form was designed to increase profits of the big players in the game: the few big music labels, movie companies and news agencies.

Since they want those additional billions, I think it’s moot to argue against the reform. If we stop them this time, they’ll be back next week.

Instead, I suggest to change the reform to force them to provide online services to license their content.

A few clicks and you’re allowed to use a piece of music or video or text for your own work. Yes, it will cost money but videos don’t grow on trees, either.

That way, the poor mega companies on this planet look good in front of their shareholders and the people creating art don’t have to waste money on fending off lawsuits.

Oh, and maybe add a clause in the law that the companies have to pass a real amount of money on to the artist. Right now, they are actively being starved by the companies (except for a few topstars who could afford the lawyers to get their share).


BundesGit: Tracking Law Changes With Git

10. August, 2012

 

Git is one of those tools with a thousand uses. Now, it’ s 1001. Stefan Wehrmeyer has started to put texts of German laws into Git to make it easier to track changes.

Related articles:

 


Musicians Need Strong Copyright Laws to be as Successful as They Already Are

25. July, 2012

When I read “Britain’s share of the global music market is higher than ever” (source) and “We can only realise this potential if we have a strong domestic copyright”, I can’t help but wonder: Isn’t the industry so successful because they have the today’s laws?


The Copyright Failure

27. March, 2012

And another of my long list of copyright posts. Can’t let it rest for some reason.

Copyright failed. As Larry Lessig said in his TED talk: Every view in the digital age is a copy. Watch a DVD and the computer/box/whatever is going to make 5 to 100 (temporary) digital copies of the movie before it is displayed on the screen: In the laser pickup, in the buffer chips that connect the laser to the system, in memory to decode the video stream, in various post processing filters, in the buffer chips that transfer the signal to the TV set, and several copies in the TV set to further improve the picture.

Let me drive this home: In this day and age, you have to break the law to watch movies and listen to music because the law says: You must not make any copies. Not even one.

The message: Standard usage of movies and music (watching, listening) is illegal under today’s copyright law. Which means we’re all serial offenders.

Or the other way around: We’re breaking the law so often, that we have concluded it’s optional. An important lesson that we inherit to our kids.

Maybe we can attack this the other way around: Why is the content industry failing? Because they sell a product in a way nobody wants.

I love to watch movies, read books and listen to music. I just don’t want to too much pay for something that I can get in better quality, faster and for free. Why do I have to wait six months to see US TV series? Why do I have to watch commercials? Why do I have to buy the album when I want a single track? Why do I have to buy the music at all when I just want to listen to it? Why do I have to watch TV at certain times?

Because no one is selling me the service I want. It’s not impossible. The “pirates” have made all this possible and for free, too. It’s just that the content industry has strangled itself too many contracts.

How is their mess our fault?

You want our money? Change.

Not convinced? Watch this: Rob Reid: The $8 billion iPod


EFF Tries To Sanitize Patent Law

23. February, 2012

The EFF has started a new campaign to clean the patent system.

I’ve blogged about the many problems of the parent system when it comes to software. If you care as well, at least spread the word. If you want to do more, check out the EFF site or maybe  help with the Patent Busting Project.


SCO vs Linux: Game Over

31. August, 2011

Finally: 10th Circuit Affirms in All Respects – Novell, Not SCO, Owns the Copyrights, etc., by pj

Of course, this is SCO … I might be a little surprised if they didn’t try to appeal to the US Supreme Court 😉

SCO or how to waste millions of dollars for naught.


Martin Fowler Chimes Into Chorus Against Software Patents

9. August, 2011

In his post “Martin Fowler on Software Patents“, Martin Fowler joins the growing group of people who argue against software patents in their current form.

Related: