Google Pushes Back Against US Copyright Treaty 233
Hugh Pickens writes "Internet companies led by Google joined groups representing Web users to challenge the Bush administration's bid to toughen international enforcement against copyright pirates. The companies said the US courts and Congress are still working out the correct balance between protecting copyrights and the free exchange of information on the Web and a treaty could be counterproductive. 'There's this assumption that what is good for Disney is what's good for America, but that's an oversimplification,' said Jonathan Band, an intellectual property lawyer representing libraries and high-tech companies. 'There's also what's good for Yahoo and Google.' The US, Japan, Canada and other nations said last year that they would begin negotiations on an agreement aimed at cracking down on counterfeiting of such goods as watches and pharmaceuticals, and the piracy of copyrighted materials, such as software and music recordings. A leaked draft of the deal showed that the treaty could force Internet service providers to cooperate with copyright holders."
One of the few bright spots of DMCA... (Score:5, Informative)
was the "safe harbor" provision. It basically kept the ISP's and websites for the most part out of the net-cop business.
btw: When one of the few very profitable American companies in this current economy makes a statement like
"It really could be used as a way of restricting the growth of U.S. Internet companies overseas"
perhaps the US government should listen
Many countries have happily ignored... (Score:5, Informative)
copyrights and patents.
Germany used to be quite famous for making fakes of machines used in the British textile manufacturing effort (right down to copying the name of the manufacturer). Many European countries didn't bother with patent protection as it interferred with their ability to make cheap knock offs.
If Einstein had been a chemist, he wouldn't have been working in the Swiss patent office, because at the time, the Swiss believed that you couldn't patent anything chemical. Canada didn't recongize drug patents until the 1960s (if memory serves).
This rich-country enforcement of patents and copyright is "kicking away the ladder" - most first-world countries conveniently ignored patents during their development, when it was to their economic benefit to be able to rip technology off from more well-to-do nations.
Re:Many countries have happily ignored... (Score:2, Informative)
Germany used to be quite famous for making fakes of machines used in the British textile manufacturing effort (right down to copying the name of the manufacturer). Many European countries didn't bother with patent protection as it interferred with their ability to make cheap knock offs.
Great Britain was the first country in the world to go through an industrial revolution. This was caused by their adoption of a patent system which rewarded innovators and led to the greatest economic empire the world has ever seen. The fact that other countries did not adopt a patent system until later doomed them to trail Great Britain in development of the institutions needed to support this industrial revolution. The fact that these countries had to copy the British inventions to compete shows how their own (patent less) systems failed to promote innovation within their own societies.
If Einstein had been a chemist, he wouldn't have been working in the Swiss patent office, because at the time, the Swiss believed that you couldn't patent anything chemical. Canada didn't recongize drug patents until the 1960s (if memory serves).
The Swiss did NOT believe that "you could not patent anything chemical". That is ridiculous. What happened in this case is that the Swiss chemical industry wanted to freely use the innovations of the far larger and more successful German chemical industry (operating under a strong patent system), and successfully delayed the introduction of chemical patents until 1907. And by the way Einstein was a very good theoretical chemist (his work on Brownian motion is often taken to be the first absolute proof of atomic theory) AND Einstein worked in the Swiss patent office until 1909, so there is a pretty good chance he DID examine chemical patent applications.
As far as Canada not recognizing drug patents until the 1960's that is poppycock. In fact as far back as 1923 Canada was wrangling with legislation that dealt with the compulsory licensing of drug patents where the active ingredients were made in Canada.
Re:Many countries have happily ignored... (Score:5, Informative)
Your examples neglect the most prominent example of this - namely the Hollywood movie industry.
You know why California is the center of the major studios' world? Because they we getting hammered by enforcement of patents when they were on the east coast.
Hollywood owes it's existence to it's deliberate evasion of "intellectual property" laws.
Re:WTF?! (Score:4, Informative)
Quick! Everybody hide!
:-D
Quick! Everybody VOTE!! :)
Re:WTF?! (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Many countries have happily ignored... (Score:5, Informative)
The fact that these countries had to copy the British inventions to compete shows how their own (patent less) systems failed to promote innovation within their own societies.
Right - because it's much harder to innovate than copy.
From Intellectual Property in Free Trade Agreements, by Sanya Reid Smith:
"If developing countries broaden and lengthen their intellectual property protection beyond their current treaty obligations while they still have reduced capacity to generate their own intellectual property, they can expect to see their royalty outflow increase. For example, according to the Malaysian Governmentâ(TM)s 9th Malaysia Plan, in 2005 there was already estimated to be a net outflow of royalties of US $1.7 billion."
Patents cost developing countries (who rarely have much patented) yet benefit countries where a large number of valuable patents reside.
The Swiss did NOT believe that "you could not patent anything chemical". That is ridiculous
From Intellectual Property in Free Trade Agreements, by Sanya Reid Smith:
"Prior to TRIPS, countries were able to tailor their level of IP protection to suit their level of development. Many of todayâ(TM)s industrialised countries such as the USA, Europe,5 Japan, South Korea and Taiwan did not have high levels of IP protection until it suited them. For example Switzerland did not allow patents on chemicals until 1978; Italy, Sweden and Switzerland did not allow patents on medicines until 1978 and Spain did not allow patents on chemicals or medicines until 1992 because it said it could not afford the higher medicine prices as a result of patents."
I am not sure what planet you live on, but it's not earth, Bizarro Slashdot Poster.
Re:Disney, Google and Yahoo? (Score:2, Informative)
Actually, if you check, that figure is capped at 10.6 trillion and they're now negotiating to get the cap raised to 11.3 trillion.
This is the only time on /. where I think the appropriate comment is that someone should be thinking about the children. Sigh.
Re:Disney, Google and Yahoo? (Score:4, Informative)
"Where does that leave its citizens?" $9,788 billion in the hole
Fixed [brillig.com].
Some historical links: Hollywood v. Edison (Score:5, Informative)
Well, it's not authoritative (I'm at work and don't have time to dig up primary sources), but here's an overview of what happened:
Studios flee to Hollywood[1]
In the early 1900s, filmmakers began moving to the Los Angeles area to get away from the strict rules imposed by Thomas Edison's Motion Picture Patents Company in New Jersey. Since most of the moviemaking patents were owned by Edison, independent filmmakers were often sued by Edison to stop their productions.
To escape his control, and because of the ideal weather conditions and varied terrain, moviemakers began to arrive in Los Angeles to make their films. If agents from Edison's company came out west to find and stop these filmmakers, adequate notice allowed for a quick escape to Mexico.
Working without disturbance from Edison, the Biograph Company moved west with actors Blanche Sweet, Lillian Gish, Mary Pickford, Lionel Barrymore, and others, to make their films. After beginning filming in Los Angeles, the company decided to explore the neighboring area and stumbled across Hollywood.
Biograph made the first film in Hollywood, entitled In Old California. After hearing of Biograph's praise of the area, other filmmakers headed west to set up shop.
The first motion picture studio was built in 1919, in nearby Edendale, just east of Hollywood, by Selig Polyscope Company, and the first one built in Hollywood was founded by filmmaker David Horsley's general manager Al Christie in 1911, in an old building on the southeast corner of Sunset Boulevard and Gower Street. Movie studios began to crop up all over Hollywood after Christie's appearance, including ones for Cecil B. DeMille in 1913, the Charlie Chaplin Studio in 1917, and many others.
[1]: http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h3871.html [u-s-history.com]
[2]: http://webpages.dcu.ie/~flynnr/hollywood_history_1891_-_1917.htm [webpages.dcu.ie] (interesting timeline)
[3]: http://www.cobbles.com/simpp_archive/edison_trust.htm [cobbles.com] (details on Edison's monopoly, which Hollywood broke)
Primary sources would take longer than I have to dig up, but you get the idea.
Re:WTF?! (Score:2, Informative)
I think it just seems that way, because though corporations enoy the rights of people they bear few of the responsibilities...