back to article Arrr: The only Pirate in European Parliament to weigh in on copyright

As speculation and arguments mount over proposed EU copyright legislation, the Pirate Party MEP will publish her report on the matter on 19 January. Julia Reda, currently the only Pirate in the European Parliament, has been made “rapporteur” on the implementation of the previous directive on the so-called 2001 Infosoc …

  1. Jeremy Allison

    Copyright contract with the public is broken.

    The dirty secret of Register Copyright articles is that they never mention the "limited time" aspect of copyright.

    Remember that ? The idea that eventually published works will go into the public domain.

    Let's see how many works went into the public domain in the USA at the end of 2014 shall we ?

    https://web.law.duke.edu/cspd/publicdomainday

    Oh that's right. Nothing. Nada. Zilch..

    Whilst this continues to be the case, the copyright contract is null and void and neither side feels any qualms about violating it. I say this as someone who makes their living via copyrights on software too.

    What a shitty situation for all concerned.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Copyright contract with the public is broken.

      Sadly, it seems that because huge corporations have decided to become involved that copyright law is in the absolute mess that it now.

      No matter what DRM they implement or whatever laws they create, you will not stop people copying others work.

      There are more fucking pressing matters we need to face up to....

      1. sisk Silver badge

        Re: Copyright contract with the public is broken.

        I would probably use more civilized language to express it, but I agree with your assessment wholeheartedly. Of the problems facing the world today intellectual property laws are probably too minor to even show up on the urgency scale, despite what big media and freetards alike seem to think.

    2. Andrew Orlowski (Written by Reg staff)
      Big Brother

      Re: Copyright contract with the public is broken.

      Hello, Jeremy. Shouldn't you declare your own dirty secret? You failed to mention it in your post.

      First off - as you and Eben told me many times, the GPL depends on strong copyright law. The GPL would not survive if property rights could not be asserted, then defended, in Court. The GPL survives because of the respect Courts have for property rights. You also need strong contract law, which you don't get in a banana republic - but you can't even get into court without the property right.

      In fact, I think you were the first to point this out. Or Eben. I can't remember.

      I can think of a "shittier situation for all concerned" - and it looks like individuals losing control of our pictures and words - so that only giant corporations can profit from our work. "Copyfighters" can whine all day about the length of copyright, but if it can't be asserted, the law is merely decorative. It doesn't matter if copyright terms are 1,000 years or a million years - if they can't be asserted, they are meaningless. If you can't assert (C), then pop goes the GPL. Along with much else.

      The Public Domain Day backfired badly, because no matter how you slice it, it means privileged white college kids want to stop paying black people. Living black artists.

      https://twitter.com/dgolumbia/status/550678771901427712

      https://twitter.com/dgolumbia/status/550679167172636672

      The dirty secret of "Jeremy Allison" these days is that he works for Google. A corporation worth $468bn. The biggest corporate lobbyist in the USA. A corporation built on not paying other people for using their stuff. So I think you need to put in a disclaimer when you comment on copyright issues.

      "These views do not reflect the view of my employer. It's just a coincidence that my employer, Google, lobbies to destroy your digital property rights, and your ability to control your identity."

      So, how is life on the plantation, Jeremy?

      1. Matt Siddall

        Re: Copyright contract with the public is broken.

        The Public Domain Day backfired badly, because no matter how you slice it, it means privileged white college kids want to stop paying black people. Living black artists.

        Straw Man much?

        Given how wealth allocation was skewed 50 years ago (and now, for that matter) I would think that actually having copyright come to an end in a reasonable time would impact white artists a lot more than black artists.

        1. This post has been deleted by a moderator

      2. This post has been deleted by a moderator

        1. This post has been deleted by a moderator

  2. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    The clueless leading the gullible

    The Pirate Party is aptly named as they are just looking to screw over artists and copyright holders because the PP suffers from the "entitlement" mentality. There is no entitlement in this world so the PP and the other folks in denial over copyright laws had better get in touch with reality. The world is not going to legalize theft of artistic works be it music, software or other copyright protected works. Get over it and buy a clue.

    1. MrDamage

      Re: The clueless leading the gullible

      Oh, you mean the same "entitlement mentality" the various publishers have, demanding that they are entitled to charge us numerous times for the exact same material, because they skimped on providing us with an actual quality product that is unable to withstand the rigours of being used exactly as intended (ie; chewed tapes, disks shattering whilst spinning on the drives)

      Or that they think they are entitled to permanent profits from people who are long since dead?

      Or that they are entitled to install rootkits and other invasive software onto our PC's, especially when this information is not provided to the consumer prior to the point of purchase, and then pointing out how its covered by their EULA (which is unenforcable due to the lack of information they give prior to purchase)?

      And for the last time, copyright infringement is NOT theft. Read carefuly, NOT THEFT.

      When you steal, you take the original item away from the owner, leaving them bereft of said item, and unable to derive any income/pleasure from it. Copying a movie/music/book does not remove the original from the owner.

      Lets face it, shills like you dug the very graves in which you lie, and complain loudest when people start to fill in that grave. Thankfully, soon your whiney bitching will stop and we wont have to listen to you anymore.

      1. Just Enough

        Re: The clueless leading the gullible

        "When you steal, you take the original item away from the owner, leaving them bereft of said item, and unable to derive any income/pleasure from it"

        When you take a copy of an artists work, and reproduce it without limit, you dilute the cash value of that artist's work to zero. Yes, they still have the original item, but it has no value over every other free copy that you have created. You have in effect stolen its value. You have left the artist unable to derive any income from it.

    2. Fluffy Bunny
      Boffin

      Re: The clueless leading the gullible

      " theft of artistic works"

      It is only theft if you can "take it away". That is, by copying an artwork, I am leaving the original in place. In other words, breach of copyright cannot be theft. The claim that breach of copyright is theft is a falsehood you often see in the media.

      1. Dr Stephen Jones
        FAIL

        @Fluffy Bunny

        1998 called. It wants its argument back.

        1. Matt Siddall

          Re: @Fluffy Bunny

          1998 called. It wants its argument back.

          So your counter-argument, which you've had 16 years to prepare is...?

  3. Andrew Orlowski (Written by Reg staff)

    "And for the last time, copyright infringement is NOT theft. Read carefuly, NOT THEFT."

    Try infringing a dubstep album, then popping along to Tottenham or Peckham to tell the guys who made it what you did, and that it is harming them.

    Please do that.

    I'll hold your coat.

    1. Matt Siddall

      Whether or not it is harming them, theft is a specific term which has a meaning incorporating the intent to permanently deprive the owner or the person with rightful possession of that property or its use. It is not accurate to use it in the case of copyright infringement.

      1. Lyndon Hills 1

        While I do agree with you, most people hearing a person referred to as a 'hacker' assume that the individual in question breaks into computers. This feels like the same argument that was raging so long ago. So basically while you're right, the majority either don't know or don't care and either way you might as well save your pixels.

        1. Pascal Monett Silver badge

          "the majority either don't know or don't care"

          And that is the true source of all the evils of the world and the root of the failure of democracy.

    2. This post has been deleted by a moderator

      1. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

        You still haven't destroyed or returned your "stolen goods" yet? Maybe you could send a cheque to each of the artists since you have a track listing.

        You ought to be careful banding words like hypocrite about.

  4. This post has been deleted by a moderator

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019