[Upd-discuss] #2 Copyright Brief History

[Michael Hart]

  This message is in MIME format.  The first part should be readable text,
  while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools.

--927332834-1724812539-1095003923=:16733
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT


On Sun, 12 Sep 2004, François Briatte wrote:

>
> On Sep 8, 2004, at 5:45 PM, Michael Hart wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 7 Sep 2004, François Briatte wrote:
>> 
>>> My statement :
>>> 
>>>>> The point is : governments have encouraged WIPO to live on its own 
>>>>> funds.
>>> 
>>> Yours:
>>> 
>>>> BUSINESSES ENCOURAGING GOVERNMENTS TO CREATE COPYRIGHT LAWS.
>>> 
>>> I am not sure we are discussing the same point. I was pointing to the 
>>> fact that member states have incited WIPO to raise its own funds. I was 
>>> not discussing copyright laws at all.
>> 
>> I really think you have it backwards here. . .WIPO, and its
>> predecessors, all the way back to the Statutes of Anne and Mary,
>> have always been "company stores."
>> 
>> The real issue is that "the member states" don't run WIPO,
>> WIPO runs the member states, as far as copyright law goes.
>
> Hard to believe:
>
> - states that do not want to be part of WIPO are not part of WIPO (the US 
> joined the Berne Conv. in 1989, if I recall well)

The US has been getting more conservative by leaps and bounds lately,
and is a staunch support of WIPO, even if mostly not well publicized.

Just look at the current pressure the US is putting on Australian
copyright law, passing on the pressure WIPO and the EU put on the US!

This trend has been going on since the assassination of President Kennedy,
with new US copyright policies in the 70's, 80's, 90's and 00's.

Before then copyright had really only changed significantly one time, 1909,
when terms were doubled.


> - states vote using the one vote per country method (whyich explains why the 
> US/EC had problems building bottom-top coalitions and had to use the WTO 
> shift to get IP as a 'string attached' to other trade issues)

Something that is still going on, I might add, as with Australia.


> In sum, WIPO indeed enjoys a certain degree of autonomy, but its convention, 
> its decision making procedures and the global satisfaction index from states 
> concerning it makes it a tool of member states.

Sorry, I must disagree. . .in the case of copyright, the goverments of
the member states are the tools of WIPO. . .just TRY to talk to them,
their decisions were a foregone conclustion. . .the only arguments
were about how the various companies were going to screw each other,
not about how they were going to screw the public!


> They write copyright law because (our occidental) governments asked for it.

Hee hee!!!

I can only laugh. . .albeit sadly. . .and refer you to all the other business
types who would LOVE to write their own regulatory legislation.

"What did you expect, I'm a scorpion!"


> Still, WIPO cannot enforce copyright law without it being enacted by the vote 
> of sovereign states. Internatl relations observers will tell you I'm 
> defending a realist position (see Susan Sell in IO 1995) against a liberal 
> one (IOs aren't empty shells etc.).

Realism is one thing, corruption is another. . . .


>> WIPO doesn't WANT to be funded by outsiders. . .publishers
>> want complete control, secrecy, anonymity, etc., and still
>> to operate with the force of law.
>> 
>> This is how they do it. . .their own funding, their own rules,
>> no accountability to anyone. . .yet they write most copyright law.
>
> We seem to agree on this point. On the rest, I would like to add some nuance 
> to what I read a few mails before, idea est I do not think it helps telling 
> "WIPO rules" while its governance scheme is a lot, lot more complex (as most 
> governance schemes).

Complexity can only hide so much of the truth. . .which is that their major
goal is to extend copyrights, and keep extending them, and to thus reduce
the free flow of information, culture, etc., to the acceptable channels,
which are HIGHLY CENSORED!

Even our most popular news people admit publicly that they can't report
on two out of three stories due to various pressure groups.



Thanks!!!


Nice To Hear From You!


Michael


Give FreeBooks!!!
In 33 Languages!!!

As of September 12, 2004
~13,770 FreeBooks at:
http://gutenberg.net
~1,230 to go to 15,000

We are 1/3+ of the way
from 10,000 to 20,000.

Michael S. Hart
<hart@pobox.com>
Project Gutenberg
Executive Coordinator
"*Internet User ~#100*"

If you do not receive
a prompt reply, please
resend, keep resending.

--927332834-1724812539-1095003923=:16733--