[dvd-discuss] Re: Law and the 'Net day II

[Seth Johnson <seth.johnson(at)realmeasures.dyndns.org>]

The following two snippets are manifestations of the WIPO
Phonograms and Performances Treaty, which declares a "moral
right" of creators to control public distribution of their
works, casting flexible uses as violating the work's creator
herself, a right that is unprecedented in America.  I'd like
to know what happened in 1990.  I have been projecting that
the next step for the content control interests would be
valorizing static works, as an effort to forge alliances
with artists against the nature of information and the
capabilities of technology.  For me, the WIPO treaty (which
came into effect only last month) seemed to mark the
beginning of this phase, in legislative terms.

One of the biggest spurs for the Performances Treaty was the
fact that the Feist Publications decision had made flexible
uses of information in the case of databases a cat that was
fully out of the bag.

I also wonder what kind of Bill created CARP.

Seth

Ruben I Safir wrote:
> 
> Digression into "moral rights" -- I, the artist, manifest myself in a novel. When that work is injured it is a violation of me, which should be protected for reasons having nothing to do with markets or other rights. Until 1990 no provision of this sort in the U.S., which grudgingly agreed. Only a few U.S. cases where it's been applied.

(and from the "Webcasting" portion:)

> Record companies responded by pressing for entitlement, namely CARP, or Copyright Arbitration Royalty Panel. When Congress did, it limited the public performance right. Only digital audio transmission. Said radio stations (analog) could continue with no restrictions. Complicated exceptions.

-- 

[CC] Counter-copyright:
http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/cc/cc.html