[Free-sklyarov-uk] New gentle-reader leaflet, plus Chuck's variant on AD's leaflet

[Edward Welbourne]

> Well I for one have changed my mind.
proof that humans are cabable of it, despite widespread evidence to
the contrary.  Assuming, of course, that you aren't a net-bot ...

> The argument for using the record companies' name and trying to put
> bad connotations on it is very compelling.

Crucially, they're going to continue using that term - it's the piece
of legal jargon they need to get courts to believe in so as to lay
claim to extra legal privileges.  We need to spread, widely, the
knowledge that their claim is a lie.  When the jury's instincts are
against the plaintif for claiming `copy-protection' privileges, it
gets easier for the defence to make the argument that the technical
measures in question didn't protect against copying, they just
deprived lawful purchasers of fair use rights which couldn't be
exercised without circumventing the given technical measures.

> ... Perhaps in print the term "copy protection" should always be in
> quotation marks. In speech, perhaps we can say "so-called copy
> protection", or use some gesture to indicate the falsehood of the
> term.

Those sound good, and I'm sure each of us will come up with our own
ways and means of signalling the irony of the wording.  Indeed, this
leads into ...

> As for a true description, perhaps "adulterated CD" - it has the
> implication of some deliberate act that's missing from "corrupted",
> and avoids saying anything about the intentions of the record
> companies.

... a further argument for sticking with - and discrediting - the
enemy's wording:

We have a huge diversity of tastes and preferences for how we want to
denigrate stuff they call `copy-protected', so finding a collectively
acceptable single term to use instead would be ... difficult.  On the
other hand, we can exploit that diversity: each of us gives the public
another angle on the evils of `so-called copy-protection'.  This is
good, because each of us has thought through our own particular angle
on it: Martin'll give a heart-felt critique of the evils of
controlling usage, Big George'll give a clear critique of corruption,
Dave'll cover adultery and (when I'm not sampling any and all) I'll do
my best to hammer home my objections to restricting access by
legitimate purchasers of copyright works.

	Eddy.
--
... it's practically impossible to copy-protect music.  But what you
can do very effectively is annoy the very people who are quite
prepared to pay for the use of music.
                   -- Dave Shapton, in Sound-on-Sound, 2001/December