[Free-sklyarov-uk] Press Release - London and Edinburgh Prote sts 30 August

[Reid Angus-BAR04Z]

On Thursday 30 August 2001  1:32 am, Julian T. J. Midgley wrote:
>
> As an author and a programmer, I make use of copyright to ensure
> that my works are available to all.  Without copyright, I would not
> have the ability to release my works under the GNU Public Licence,
> for example.  I oppose poorly thought out copy protection laws, and
> I oppose the needless extension of copyright for ever longer
> periods in the interests of corporations. =20

I also pretty much agree with this position. I certainly agree that it's the correct position for the CFDR to take on this issue.

To try and avoid this being a 'me too' post, I'd like to add a little more discussion which I think is relevant to this point. Apologies if I start by going over old ground.

Copyright has been a good system, and up until recently has worked well as a way to encourage/allow production of content. In the presence of an unfettered communications system though, it gets much harder to enforce it. Without draconian laws like the DMCA, it *will* become more and more difficult to enforce. As DRM software is cracked, and it will be if you believe Bruce Schneier et al, then digital media will probably be broadcast far and wide. The problem will be that it won't be large, centralised, prosecutable, piracy operations that do the copying, it'll be a napster/gnutella/freenet type system. Loads of little guys swapping stuff*. Prosecuting them with current copyright laws would be exceptionally difficult and inefficent. Using something like the anti-circumvention sections of the DMCA allows prosecutors to attack small targets again.

We are likely to be asked how we propose to defend copyright in the absence of a legal defence of DRM systems. It's a reasonable question. If we support copyright, how do we defend it? My own opinion is that it's probably impossible, without turning the internet into some kind of police state (I know that sounds like FUD, but I can't think of a better way to describe it). Without that kind of protection, then charging by the copy will become a worse and worse business model as time goes on, and file sharing software improves.

However, if the CFDR is to be taken seriously as a supporter of copyright, then I think we might need to come up with a better answer to that question. I guess a more fundamental question is whether Julian's proposed position is internally consistent? If we ever make it to Newsnight again, is Paxo just going to skin and gut us on this issue?

Luck for the protests this afternoon. Sorry I can't make it this time.

Cheers, Gus

* NB I know that even on Gnutella this isn't the case at the moment; it tends to be people with fat pipes that host most of the content. They're prosecutable now, but I posit that this will change as broadband becomes widespread and more people can become providers.