[free-sklyarov] Wretched article at inside.com

[alfee cube]

yes - your being generous in your language karsten.

--- "Karsten M. Self" <kmself at ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> on Sat, Aug 04, 2001 at 05:45:39PM -0700, Jon O .
> (jono at microshaft.org) wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Anyone for a march on the AAP offices during
> Usenix?  These people
> > > > have basically declared war on programmers.
> > > >
> > > > -Doug
> > > 
> > > Not just programmers but on the Republic itself.
> The more I read
> > > what the founding fathers *meant with copyright
> and about their
> > > concerns about monopolies granted by the state,
> I'm moving to the
> > > position that people such as Parloff are
> traitors to the Republic.
> > > 
> > > And I'm not just throwing words. I *mean it.
> > > 
> > > The free flow of ideas is essential to
> maintaining a democracy. Ours
> > > is in enough trouble with a public that is
> becoming increasingly
> > > less educated and informed. But to directly
> assault the limitations
> > > the founders meant on monopolies on information
> is to betray what
> > > this nation allegeds to be.
> > > 
> > > "Intellectual property" is, I now think,
> treason.
> > > 
> > 
> > Also, bear in mind the DMCA came from a treaty
> with the WIPO. I think
> > someone mentioned this, but just to toss it out
> again, doesn't this
> > treaty overrule our national laws. Meaning, how
> much effect would our
> > Supreme Court have over the WIPO or laws coming
> down from them? It
> > seems like we are also losing our "Checks and
> Balances."
> 
> As noted, treaties are subject to, not superior to,
> the Constitution.
> 
> The treaty as presented doesn't call for the
> fascistic measures imposed
> in the US DMCA.  It does call for effective legal
> penalties over
> circumvention of 
> 
>     Article 11:  Obligations concerning
> Technological Measures
> 
>     Contracting Parties shall provide adequate legal
> protection and
>     effective legal remedies against the
> circumvention of effective
>     technological measures that are used by authors
> in connection with
>     the exercise of their rights under this Treaty
> or the Berne
>     Convention and that restrict acts, in respect of
> their works, which
>     are not authorized by the authors concerned or
> permitted by law.
> 
>    
>
http://www.wipo.org/eng/diplconf/distrib/treaty01.htm
> 
> Note "in respect of THEIR works, which are not
> authorized BY THE AUTHORS
> concerned OR PERMITTED BY LAW" (emphasis added).
> 
> It would seem to me that the DMCA grossly oversteps
> the WIPO guidelines
> themselves by:
> 
>   - Proscriptively prohibiting actions otherwise
> allowed by law.
> 
>   - Prohibiting actions regardless of whether they
> are applied to
>     works addressed under the treaty.  "Their works"
> would tend to
>     exclude works already under, say, public domain,
> or otherwise not
>     covered by copyright.
> 
>   - Seeking authorization from publishers and
> technology licensees,
>     rather than authors.
> 
>   - Creating a new class of prohibitions against
> actions unrelated to
>     copyright violations alltogether.
> 
> As one-sided as WIPO is, the DMCA makes a bad thing
> far worse.
> 
> -- 
> Karsten M. Self <kmself at ix.netcom.com>           
> http://kmself.home.netcom.com/
>  What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand?       
>        There is no K5 cabal
>   http://gestalt-system.sourceforge.net/            
>     http://www.kuro5hin.org
>    Free Dmitry!! Boycott Adobe!! Repeal the DMCA!!  
> http://www.freesklyarov.org
> Geek for Hire                         
> http://kmself.home.netcom.com/resume.html
> 

> ATTACHMENT part 2 application/pgp-signature 



__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make international calls for as low as $.04/minute with Yahoo! Messenger
http://phonecard.yahoo.com/