LJ Copyright Stupidity
WTF LIVEJOURNAL SCAREMONGERERS. SHUT UP.
"The United States delegation to the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) has been one of the strongest supporters of efforts to create a new intellectual property right for broadcasters and cablecasters through a new WIPO treaty. If adopted, the treaty would give broadcasters, cablecasters and potentially webcasting companies 50 years of copyright-like rights over anything they transmit, including public domain and Creative Commons-licensed works. It would also give broadcasters legal protection to use technology to lock down content, giving them control over how you use broadcasts received by your television, radio and possibly personal computer and control over how those devices are designed and built.
The new Broadcasting Treaty is likely to restrict your access to knowledge and culture, and it lets broadcasters make decisions that should be left in the hands of creators and the public.
[Source]
If adopted, the WIPO treaty will give broadcasters 50 years of copyright-like control over the content of their broadcasts, even when they have no copyright in what they show. A TV channel broadcasting your Creative Commons-licensed movie could legally demand that no one record or redistribute it-and sue anyone who does. And TV companies could use their new rights to go after TiVo or MythTV for daring to let you skip advertisements or record programs in DRM-free formats.
[Source]
If that wasn't bad enough, the US contingent at WIPO is pushing to have the treaty expanded to cover the Net. That means that anyone who feeds your "sound and images" through a web server would have a right to meddle with what you do with the webcast simply because they serve as the middleman between you and the creator.
[Source] [More Information]"
To quote a comment I left over at
bloodrebel333's journal:
I don't believe this. It's totally impossible. It has to be scaremongering. LJ makes us state that they are not liable for anything we post so that they can't get sued--why on earth would they suddenly open up and leave themselves to be liable for every crap thing that stupid or not-so-stupid people posted on livejournal? There was an article in the high-end magazine of Cosmo about a girl who joined a suicide LJ community, talked about "not being able to take it anymore" and "wanting to leave", and people there supported her and told her that they wanted her to go if she could find peace that way--they were sharing ideas on how to commit suicide, everything. Now the parents are furious at the community, and I will bet you anything that if there wasn't that little thing that made users say that Livejournal wasn't liable for anything users wrote, Livejournal would be sued beyond just normal bankruptcy. It's impossible for them to do this. The losses would far outweigh the incredibly minimal gain.
I don't believe so many people are buying into this. LIVEJOURNAL IS NOT THAT STUPID.
So stop it.
--Sohara
"The United States delegation to the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) has been one of the strongest supporters of efforts to create a new intellectual property right for broadcasters and cablecasters through a new WIPO treaty. If adopted, the treaty would give broadcasters, cablecasters and potentially webcasting companies 50 years of copyright-like rights over anything they transmit, including public domain and Creative Commons-licensed works. It would also give broadcasters legal protection to use technology to lock down content, giving them control over how you use broadcasts received by your television, radio and possibly personal computer and control over how those devices are designed and built.
The new Broadcasting Treaty is likely to restrict your access to knowledge and culture, and it lets broadcasters make decisions that should be left in the hands of creators and the public.
[Source]
If adopted, the WIPO treaty will give broadcasters 50 years of copyright-like control over the content of their broadcasts, even when they have no copyright in what they show. A TV channel broadcasting your Creative Commons-licensed movie could legally demand that no one record or redistribute it-and sue anyone who does. And TV companies could use their new rights to go after TiVo or MythTV for daring to let you skip advertisements or record programs in DRM-free formats.
[Source]
If that wasn't bad enough, the US contingent at WIPO is pushing to have the treaty expanded to cover the Net. That means that anyone who feeds your "sound and images" through a web server would have a right to meddle with what you do with the webcast simply because they serve as the middleman between you and the creator.
[Source] [More Information]"
To quote a comment I left over at
bloodrebel333's journal:
I don't believe this. It's totally impossible. It has to be scaremongering. LJ makes us state that they are not liable for anything we post so that they can't get sued--why on earth would they suddenly open up and leave themselves to be liable for every crap thing that stupid or not-so-stupid people posted on livejournal? There was an article in the high-end magazine of Cosmo about a girl who joined a suicide LJ community, talked about "not being able to take it anymore" and "wanting to leave", and people there supported her and told her that they wanted her to go if she could find peace that way--they were sharing ideas on how to commit suicide, everything. Now the parents are furious at the community, and I will bet you anything that if there wasn't that little thing that made users say that Livejournal wasn't liable for anything users wrote, Livejournal would be sued beyond just normal bankruptcy. It's impossible for them to do this. The losses would far outweigh the incredibly minimal gain.
I don't believe so many people are buying into this. LIVEJOURNAL IS NOT THAT STUPID.
So stop it.
--Sohara