A Declaration of Internet Freedom
Groups Align to Protect Internet From Censorship, Stupidity
Numerous groups including the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and Free Press have today made a Declaration of Internet Freedom
, taking a stand against any and all apparent attempts to throttle, filter or otherwise censor the Internet -- particularly without an open conversation among the Internet's most important stake holders (that would be you). This is just the beginning of a process aimed at starting an open and transparent discussion on how advocates, users, consumers and other interested organizations can work together to limit censorship, improve availability of low-cost connectivity, protect innovation, and protect user privacy.
Users interested in discussing -- and participating in -- the push can do so at Reddit
and over at Cheezeburger
. If you're interested in signing the declaration, it can be found here
From the Declaration:
We believe that a free and open Internet can bring about a better world. To keep the Internet free and open, we call on communities, industries and countries to recognize these principles. We believe that they will help to bring about more creativity, more innovation and more open societies.
We are joining an international movement to defend our freedoms because we believe that they are worth fighting for.
Let’s discuss these principles — agree or disagree with them, debate them, translate them, make them your own and broaden the discussion with your community — as only the Internet can make possible.
Join us in keeping the Internet free and open.
Translation of some EFF terms Promote Universal Access: that means government subsidized broadband - another welfare benefit.
Don't punish innovators for their users actions: This means it is alright for web sites to provide a means for users to steal copyrighted materials while making tons of money off piracy(aka as "The Pirate Bay people are wonderful" clause).
Re: Translation of some EFF terms That's kind of rude. If you're going to argue with someone, argue with their facts and not their source.
I understand it is frustrating arguing with propaganda or a commercial posting, because they are not here to learn anything or consider other points of view. The best thing you can do is ignore them and have a discussion with someone else who is "real".
| || That depends on how you look at it. I'll bet your phone has a built-in MP3 player, or maybe you have a standalone player. Well, when the Diamond Rio came out in the late 1990s, the RIAA actually sued to have it pulled off the market because they claimed it violated the Audio Home Recording Act. Basically, they didn't feel that you should be able to convert your CD's into MP3's and store them on a device such as this.|
In the view of some, if a piece of hardware or a service can be used to commit copyright infringement, then it shouldn't be allowed on the market. That isn't the legal standard, but that seems to be the attitude that is being taken by the studios and even some in government. And they will take the concept of what constitutes copyright infringements to ridiculous levels, even going so far as to claim that making backup copies of DVD's is somehow illegal. They'll tell you that you don't actually own that disc but that you simply purchased a license to watch the film. OK, so, should the disc become damaged, then shouldn't they replace it? Oh no, you bought the disc, so you're responsible for that, but you can't take steps to prevent it, such as making a copy to use while keeping the original safely locked up.
Oh, and let's not forget that they've gamed the system so that works never fall out of copyright anymore as they're supposed to.
So, essentially, the whole system is rigged. The copyright owners think that they should decide what constitutes infringement, and then they say that anything that could potentially be used for infringement, despite any legitimate uses, should never see the light of day. Then, even if you hold out a ray of hope that these works will someday enter the public domain, your hopes will be dashed when these companies once again bribe Congress to pass yet another copyright extension.
So, no, I have no problem with the position the EFF is taking.
Re: Sounds pretty fair to me.
said by El Quintron:the presidents cabinet is filled with former RIAA and MPAA lawyers, and those companies have gotten too big, so if no one bought music, movies and software, and instead loaned it from a library until these companies went out of business, then things would go back to normal. right now it's like they run the government.
I think most of the points laid out are pretty standard fare. A concrete plan on how to achieve these objectives would probably be helpful as well.