Assimilation Copyright Uploaded by geo.

on Jul 22, 2006 Civilization, the thing that makes humans different from the other animals on th is planet, is the ability to pass knowledge down from generation to generation w ith each successive generation building on the knowledge of all generations that came before.

It is this human knowledgebase which has allowed us to progress to the point we a re at today and it is this knowledgebase that is now under attack, an attack tha t threatens the very roots of civilization.

In 1790 George Washington signed into law Copyright Act of 1790, which a temporary monopoly on the knowledge to authors, and inventors of that e with a limitation of 28 years. The reason for this temporary monopoly llow Authors and Inventors a reasonable return on their labors. (note I ay maximizing profits)

granted knowledg was to a didn't s

After that 28 years was up the knowledge became part of the human knowledge bas e and civilization could once again build freely on that knowledge.

All copyright and patent law in the US is based on an article in the Constituti on, which granted congress the power "to promote the Progress of Science and use ful Arts, by securing for limited times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive R ight to their respective Writings and Discoveries."

At the time it may have seemed like a good idea to grant a temporary monopoly i n order to allow authors (copyright) and inventors (patent) time to profit from their writings and discoveries and this article became the bases for both copyri

ght and patent laws. However the founding fathers were very careful not to make the mistakes Europe had made in creating a monopoly. They specifically worded th e constitution to allow for authors and inventors to get a fair return but also to prevent copyright and patents from being used as a control mechanism to contr ol knowledge which was the reasoning behind Copyright in Europe. This was a very important difference between the power granted to congress in the constitution and what had happened in European copyright laws. Also notice that the words "fa ir return" were used instead of "maximize profits". Copyright is not about maxim izing profits, it's possible to get a fair return even with limited copying goin g on, in fact it was legal to copy as long as money wasn't involved up until 197 6 when our copyright laws were changed.

Since that time, many revisions have been made to the laws, inspired most latel y by industries that have become addicted to this temporary monopoly for their v ery survival. Currently the term of copyright for a corporation is 95 years from day of publication or 120 years from date of creation, whichever comes first. F or non-corporate authors the copyright lasts "life plus 70" meaning 70 years PAS T the authors death (like that's going to motivate him to create more).

How in the world anyone can consider 120 years temporary in any sense of the word is beyond me. A man can be born, live a full 70 year life, die, his children ca n live full 70 year lives and die and in all that time the knowledge is still pr otected by copyright. In the eyes of the man and his children, thats forever, its certainly not temporary as specified in the constitution.

The perfect example of this insanity, you've heard of the current version of the TV show Star Trek called "Enterprise"? Well the copyright on that show won't ex pire until just about the time that the show takes place, the Enterprise will be a reality when the copyrights finally expire!

What this means is that basically no copyrighted material published since 1907 would have had the copyright expire. Thats not really the case since the extensio ns were not in place in 1907 and some works have expired under the terms of the time. However if todays laws were in effect in 1907, No copyrighted knowledge in the past 95 years would have been added to the human knowledgebase upon which ev eryone may freely build.

Furthermore, with the addition of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, these c opyright based industries are now trying to find ways to protect their business models using technology called "Copy protection" "Activation" or "DRM, Digital R ights Management" instead of copyright to limit access to this knowledge thus ex tending the term of copyright effectively to infinity. They are in effect, doing their own law enforcement instead of relying on society to provide it.

For some good history on this where copyright and patents originated I suggest you read a most excellent paper on the web The Purpose of Copyright by Lydia Pall as Loren. It is perhaps the best paper I've read on the subject.

This extension of copyright duration is a threat against the very fabric of our civilization. What started out as a temporary monopoly that the public was will ing to accept is now being assimilated into a business model designed to allow m ega corporations to control this knowledge indefinitely. It is in effect the cre ation of a new form of property instead of the temporary right our founding fath ers had envisioned.

The Danger

In the copyright act of 1976, a fairly complete overhauling of our copyright la ws was done to bring them up to date and in line with European copyright law, so mething the constitutional power granted to congress was designed to avoid. In b ringing them in line with international standards we fell into a trap which goes counter to the ideals our country was founded under. To understand the danger y ou need a little history.

In 1790, it was a different world. Shipping printed books around the country co uld take months. In trying to decide a duration for copyright, congress most def initely had to take the speed of the economy into consideration. Back then the e conomy was very slow and they came up with a duration of 14 years with a possibl e extension to 28 years total duration.

Now taking that into consideration, today's economy moves much faster. You can ship printed books half way around the planet overnight and electronic media is instantaneous. So taking that into consideration perhaps the copyright duration should be something shorter, maybe 4-5 years, maybe less. Certainly the movie an d software industries can make a "fair return" in that time.

But instead of shorting copyright duration, the copyright act of 1976 lengthene d it to bring it into compliance with other international copyright laws that we re not intended to allow authors and inventors a fair return on their work but w as instead created as a control mechanism with which speech, information, and id eas could be silenced.

In 1995 copyright terms were lengthened again.

In 1998 the Digital Millennium Copyright Act made it illegal to disable electro nic protection mechanisms designed to protect copyrighted material. These electr onic protections will effectively copyright the material as long as they are in existence, even beyond the legal copyright durations.

All of these things point to an information based society that is increasingly

being held hostage by industries that survive off the monopoly granted by copyri ght. It is no longer about allowing authors and inventors a fair return on their work, it is now about "property" as these corporations view it and control over that "property". Copyright is not property, it is a temporary exclusive right.

These corporations are not ever going to allow copyrights to expire, they cant i ts against their business models. Patents are also being used for control now, so ftware patents threaten OSS software writers and can be used to eliminate compet ition.

Why is this bad? Why not allow these corporations to exist via this business mo del?

The best example would be Polaroid patents. Polaroid was granted a patent on in stant film cameras. They managed to renew and extend the effective term of this government granted monopoly on knowledge for the entire useful life of the insta nt film camera. From invention to the death of instant film cameras at the hands of digital photography, Polaroid was the only company who was allowed to market instant film cameras. Kodak tried at one point but Polaroid sued them and they had to withdraw their product from the market.

As a result of this, the free market process was never allowed to have the expa nding effect on this technology. Imagine all the missed opportunities for instan t film technology and the price cuts that go along with competition in a free ma rket. Look at how many digital photography devices exist in just the short time that digital photography has been evolving, all this was missed because Polaroid was allowed to monopolize the instant film technology.

Today in a more software oriented world, copyright takes the place of patents. Ask yourself why DOS or Windows 3.1 needs 95 years copyright protection? Did the

authors at Microsoft not make a reasonable return in the first few years? Did y ou know the backspace key on your keyboard is patented? Did you know entry into the technology market is almost completely controlled via patent portfolios held by large companies like IBM who dictate the terms for licensing knowledge that has been around for well over 10 years in a market where the technology is obsol ete after 5 years?

As more and more knowledge is protected in this manner for longer and longer te rms we will experience an entanglement of knowledge and technology that strangle s the process of invention.

In order to explain this entanglement danger you need to imagine if other more historic technologies had been protected for extended terms.

Lets pretend the following items were protected monopolies:

The Wheel

Glass

The Light bulb

Electricity

The Magnet

The Electric Motor

Steel

Can you imagine what a mess it would be to license all these technologies just to make a childs bicycle generator/light? Also can you see the effect on society if there were only one light bulb company or one car company or one electricity company or one steel company because they chose not to license the technology to others but instead did as Polaroid did and kept the market to themselves?

This is the danger, as more and more current knowledge is protected for longer and longer terms, the act of building upon that knowledge gets more and more ent angled with past knowledge until the web of entanglement strangles the arts and sciences to the point where you just cant do anything anymore.

Our markets are increasingly becoming affected by software and software copyrig

hts. Unlike Patents, Copyrights terms have already been extended to unreasonable time periods and as more of the economy is based on software products this will have a huge effect on us.

This is why the constitution specifically said for a limited time and this is the point that seems to be lost on our current law makers.

quote from the 1909 congress regarding music copyrights.

http://www.theyscrewedusagain.com/copyrightact1909.htm Submitted by : geo. Date Submitted : 07/22/2006 Category : Law Views : 1053