The Right to Read
Taliesin_2
shane@cais.com
Sat May 16 23:24:47 1998
I am posting this here so others might pass it onto other boards & the various Celtic Reconstructionism & pagan lists they are on.*br*                      - Taliesin_2*br*----------------------------------------------------------------------*br*This should be of interest to everyone.*p*M'Shalla Lee*p**p*[This is Simson's article in *The Boston Globe*, 7 May 1998.  PGN]*br*>*br*>Two bills that are up for a vote in the House of Representatives could*br*>seriously jeopardize the right of Americans to read in the next century.*br*The*br*>backers of these bills say that the legislation is necessary to protect*br*the*br*>interests of creative individuals and publishers in the digital age.  But*br*>the legislation goes further by allow publishers to repeal the "fair use"*br*>provisions of today's copyright law and creating a whole new category of*br*>intellectual property.*br*>*br*>The first bill, strongly backed by the Clinton Administration, is the*br*"WIPO*br*>Copyright Treaties Implementation Act," (H. R. 2281). This bill is*br*designed*br*>to implement sections of the World Intellectual Property Organization*br*treaty*br*>that was adopted back in December 1996. The bill creates a new kind of*br*crime*br*>in US law, the crime of "circumvention." It's a kind of crime that one*br*would*br*>expect in George Orwell's 1984, rather than in the America of the next*br*>century.*br*>*br*>H.R. 2281 is being supported by big publishing interests including Time*br*>Warner, Viacom, the Motion Picture Association of America, and Microsoft.*br*>These organizations are terrified by the way computers and digital*br*networks*br*>make it easy to copy books, songs, videos and computer programs. For years*br*>these groups have tried to stop illegal copying with copy-protection*br*>systems. H.R. 2281 would make it a crime to subvert these systems for any*br*>purpose whatsoever.*br*>*br*>The problem with this legislation, says Adam Eisgrau, Legislative Counsel*br*of*br*>the American Library Association's Washington Office, is that many*br*>publishers are likely to use copy-protection systems to restrict*br*activities*br*>that are otherwise lawful.*br*>*br*>For example, many web sites on the Internet today as you to register with*br*>your name and e-mail address before you can view the information that they*br*>contain. A substantial number of people bristle at this notion, and they*br*>have figured out ways to circumvent the registration process. Under the*br*>legislation, these people could be sued and awarded $200 to $2,500 in*br*>statutory damages for each web page that they viewed.*br*>*br*>And its not just consumer groups that are upset about the legislation. As*br*it*br*>currently exists, the legislation would make it a felony for engineers to*br*>open up competing products and see how they work--- "something that is*br*>essential for achieving interoperability in the industry," says Lowell*br*>Sachs, the government affairs representative of Sun Microsystems. "So far,*br*>the House has failed to focus upon the very real threat that its actions*br*>could pose to competition and innovation in the United State."*br*>*br*>The criminal provisions of H.R. 2281 apply even if the offender is legally*br*>entitled to the information that is under copyright management control.*br*For*br*>example, the Supreme Court has ruled that individuals have a right to*br*record*br*>movies off the air and view them at a later time. Nevertheless, the film*br*>industry doesn't want us to make our own tapes---they want us to buy*br*>pre-recorded tapes. In the future, the film industry might create a new*br*>copyright protection system that prevents home taping off the Internet*br*>unless a person pays an additional fee. Under the proposed legislation, a*br*>person who circumvented this new copy-protection system and made their own*br*>legal home copy would nevertheless be guilty of circumvention, and*br*>potentially subject to a fine of $500,000 and 5 years imprisonment for the*br*>first offense.*br*>*br*>The author of the bill "are very clever," says Adam Eisgrau. "They don't*br*>repeal the legal basis of fair use," which would create a huge political*br*>outcry. Instead, the legislation "creates a new law which makes fair use*br*>impossible to exercise, unless the appropriate price is paid." And that's*br*>not Fair Use at all.*br*>*br*>The second bill that should give lawmakers pause is H.R. 2652, the*br*>"Collections of Information Antipiracy Act." This law, if passed, would*br*give*br*>legal protection to the contents of databases over and above what is*br*>provided by today's copyright law.*br*>*br*>The database law finds its genesis in a 1991 Supreme Court decision, Feist*br*>Publications, Inc. v. Rural Telephone Service Co., in which the Court*br*ruled*br*>that the factual information in a telephone white pages---a large database*br*>of names, addresses and phone numbers---cannot be copyrighted. This*br*decision*br*>is one of the key factors responsible for the proliferation of "white*br*pages"*br*>services on the Internet like Switchboard.COM.*br*>*br*>H.R. 2652 would basically overturn the Feist decision, making it a crime*br*to*br*>extract data from a "collection of information" and use it in a way that*br*>harms the real or potential economic interest of the collection's owner.*br*One*br*>of the fundamental problems with this bill, says the EFF, is that there's*br*no*br*>limit to the kind of information that can receive protection once it is*br*put*br*>into a databank. In particular, government information and information*br*>that's in that's already in the public domain could be dropped into a*br*>computerized databank and then receive new, copyright-like protections.*br*And*br*>the Act doesn't have any exemptions for "fair use."*br*>*br*>So how could all of this impact on our right to read? Just ask Richard*br*>Stallman, founder of the Free Software Foundation. In his story "The Right*br*>To Read," Stallman argues convincingly that new restrictions on*br*information*br*>will ultimately force people to pay for every book and article that they*br*>read, whether they are at home, at work, or at school.*br*>*br*>Stallman's story is a science fiction parable in which one college student*br*>risks imprisonment by lending his computer to his girlfriend and telling*br*her*br*>his password---in effect, giving her access to books that he has licensed*br*>for himself. "Dan knew she came from a middle-class family and could*br*hardly*br*>afford the tuition, let alone her reading fees. Reading his books might be*br*>the only way she could graduate," Stallman writes. You can find the entire*br*>story at http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html*br*>*br*>Indeed, if you want find out more about these issues, there's no better*br*>place to turn than the Web. A group opposed to the legislation called the*br*>Digital Future Coalition has put together a website at http://www.dfc.org/*br*>explaining the problems. Meanwhile, a group of publishers have banded*br*>together and created their own competing group, the Creative Incentive*br*>Coalition. You can find its website at http://www.cic.org/. Finally, you*br*can*br*>download the full text of these bills from the Library of Congress's*br*Thomas*br*>system at http://thomas.loc.gov/.*br*>*br*>But hurry, while you still have a right to read.*br*>