[free-sklyarov] [DMCA_discuss] CNET - Security workers: Copyright law stifles

[bahrainperson1 at cyber-rights.net]

 >  I'd argue that the real threat to security tool writers and researchers
>is not the DMCA, but rather the Council of Europe Draft Convention on
>Cybercrime at http://conventions.coe.int/Treaty/EN/projets/FinalCybercrime.htm.

The problem with both of these laws is the same. They wish to define software 
as a device, either partially or totally.What it seems to me that we want 
is to define software as 100% expression and thus protected speech .

On the one hand we have a powerful group of media companies, on the other 
the US department of Justice. Both seem to want to define software in whatever 
way is most advantageous for them to accomplish their goals. What is their 
goal? There's is goal of all large, conservative, hierarchical organizations. 
control. Absolute control.

The european parliment, which from what I understand, is a completely appointed 
body and in them the DOJ has found a willing ear to their view of the world. 
For their purposes the DOJ  wants software defined to be a device..." a 
device, including a computer program, "...  There in fact is the rub. If 
software is a device, not expression, the DOJ can control it just like lockpicks,
 guns and drugs. No problem, the DOJ makes a business of controlling devices.

What the DMCA proponents do not mention, and what the DOJ is terrified of 
in the US is the interpretation of software as 100% expression. If it were 
then maybe just maybe someone might make the connection between software 
and speech, and then they would be caught, undone by that increasingly, 
it seems, anachronistic idea of Freedom of  Speech.

I give them full credit. These people are cunning, manipulative and methodical. 
They whisper in the ears of those in power whatever mantra they think will 
curry them the most favour, or if that fails simply drive a truckload of 
money up to the front door and ring the bell. They know that if they cannot 
get a law passed in one country that they can find another country to pass 
the law in. A country that perhaps is not so strict about such arcane concepts 
as protect speech and other fundamental rights.

Think about it. The US Department of Justice, who cannot get a law passed 
in the US for fear of constitutional barriers simply finds a foreign body 
who is amenable to passing their legislation for them in the full knowledge 
that the law will in fact be directly applicable to the american population. 
A population who cannot even depend on their own freedoms to protect them 
due to international treaty. I am curious how long has the US Department 
of Justice had the power to not only enforce laws, but make them? I thought 
that was the job of congress and elected officials? I think they have a 
name for a country where the police make laws, I believe it is called a 
police state.

Have a nice day. :)