Anarchism FAQ?! WTF?...

[Jan Claeys]

On do, 2007-02-15 at 17:21 -0500, Eric Dunbar wrote:
> On 14/02/07, Jan Claeys <lists at janc.be> wrote:
> > On di, 2007-02-13 at 22:11 -0500, Eric Dunbar wrote:
> > > As for the distinction between IP prosecutions and political
> > > PERSECUTION -- I think that's a fairly self-evident comparison. The
> > > one is trivial and relates to REASONABLE legal limits and the rule of
> > > law within the confines of human rights and freedoms protections [1]
> > > whereas the other is subject arbitrary detention without the
> > > protection of law operating within the confines of strong human rights
> > > and freedoms protections.
> >
> > Unfortunately those "political" laws exist, and not only in countries
> > with a non-democratic government.
> > E.g. including a package that contains the text of "Mein Kampf" could
> > result in the Ubuntu package archives to be blocked for German users.
> 
> In all likelihood it would not be blocked for those users. Oftentimes
> the prohibition of Mein Kampf is in the context of sales and/or in the
> promotion of hatred or of war.

Well, it probably wouldn't take long before some neo-nazi sites would
link to Ubuntu...

>  Also, the consideration there is that
> there arguably quite legitimate given the history of those materials.
> Plus, people in these situations are protected by strong due process
> laws.
> 
> Freedom of expression is not absolute!

Given history, reading 'Mein Kampf' isn't more "dangerous" than reading
the bible or the quran(sp?) or some communist propaganda or ...


> > Most people think "IP laws" like the DMCA & EUCD are quite unreasonable,
> > but we don't include libdvdcss2 because they exist...
> 
> I suspect "most" is not an accurate description. Whatever the faults
> of DMCA and EUCD, the flipside is also the case. Without strong IP and
> copy right protection the GNU GPL would not be enforceable either.

The problem with those two is that they go much further than just
copyright protection, and are actually dangerous in some cases.
And the GPL doesn't need them (putting copy-protection on GPL'ed sources
is probably illegal anyway?).

> > I _don't_ want to exclude packages for those reasons though; but we
> > might have to host such packages only in countries with less insane
> > laws.  That would maybe also allow the Ubuntu project to e.g. provide
> > things like the DVD CSS decryption library in some countries...
> 
> I find such things as DVD protection problematic when it prevents the
> owners of the physical DVD (for e.g.) from making legitimate backups
> (in the absence of an inexpensive way for individuals to request
> replacements if their DVD is damaged). However, much (and I do not at
> all hesitate in saying this) of the DVD "copying" efforts are not for
> fair use and for backing up but for straight up piracy.

The problem is not (only) with making backup copies of your DVD, it's
about actually being able to play the content on the DVDs that you paid
for (either by buying or renting them).


> Yes, it's a
> three way battle -- pirates - legitimate users - production companies.
> Pirates screw regular users by screwing the production companies.
> Anyway, however much I find the DMCA (and its ilk) distasteful, in the
> absence of a perfectly lawful society or an alternative distribution
> mechanism for the production companies, it is a necessary evil.
> Unfortunately, as with every necessary evil, other legitimate
> enterprises get caught in the middle (e.g. divulging unfixed security
> flaws).

DMCA & EUCD have had almost zero impact on "piracy", while at the same
time its applications have annoyed a very large number of (paying)
consumers.

To give you one example: I have never seen a CD copy-protection that
stopped me from ripping those CDs, but most copyright protections make
it impossible to play those CDs in my CD players until I rip them and
burn a copy without copy protection.
Now, my ripping of those "copy-protected" CDs is illegal...


I hope that one day there is a law that declares harmful and ineffective
laws to be illegal...  ;-)


-- 
Jan Claeys