You are certainly correct there though - either way I'd want to opt for the simple option first give it a few years and then say - 'This is copyright infringement, its a little like stealing but a bit different'.
Device for the distribution of music ... - Google Patents
Techdirt covers it here: That Didn't Take Long: Spotify Sued For Patent Infringement Just Weeks After Entering US Market | Techdirt
Is it any wonder why app developers are pulling out the US?
App developers withdraw from US as patent fears reach 'tipping point' | Technology | guardian.co.uk
Oops, mistyped - I meant 'are' not aren't. lol
now a precedent has been set:
A group of UK copyright lobbyists held confidential, closed-door meetings with Ed Vaizey, Minister for Culture, Communications and Creative Industries to discuss a plan to allow industry groups to censor the Internet in the UK. The proposal has leaked, and it reveals a plan to establish “expert bodies” that would decide which websites British people were allowed to see, to be approved by a judge using a “streamlined” procedure. The procedure will allow for “swift” blocking in order to shut down streaming of live events.
Public interest groups like the Open Rights Group asked to attend the meeting, but were shut out, presaging a regulatory process that’s likely to be a lopsided, industry-centric affair that doesn’t consider the public. The process is characterised as “voluntary,” but the proposal makes reference to the Digital Economy Act, which allows for mandatory web-blocking (thanks to the action of LibDem Lords who submitted a proposal written by a record industry lobbyist as an amendment to the DEA).
LEAKED: UK copyright lobby holds closed-door meetings with gov’t to discuss national Web-censorship regime – Boing Boing
The Open Rights Group has a campaign to repeal the DEA that you can sign onto:
Open Rights Group | Ask your MP to support the United Nations report
a) who could have predicted that a system to block child porn would eventually be used to block lots more things
b) doesn't matter, people will just route about the problem, maths always beats laws
any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic
Everybody on this thread so far has talked sense, but then that's not surprising given that the nature of posters is bent towards a techie point of view.
My main problem with this court ruling is that any tech savvy interpreter would clearly be able to see that this is neither a solution to piracy nor a benefit to the plaintiff. However the judge wasn't able to see this as they're expected to be a 'jack of all trades'.
Maybe the judicial system needs reviweing when it comes to cases that deal with new technology (and let's face it, anything connected with that t'internet thingy is still relatively new to most ancient judges) be reviewed and judged by somebody with a thorough understanding of the technical details.
To use a real world analogy, this is the same as saying Alan, who lives at the end of the street, knows a guy called Bob, who can get you some high quality knock off gear, and Alan is quite happy to tell you where Bob lives. This ruling is the same as telling the highways agency to close off the part of the street leading to Alan's house. It sets a dangerous precedent of impeding Alan's daily activity, stopping his mates or his gran coming round who just want a cuppa, and if Alan's neighbour, Charlie, also knows where Bob lives, he could also end up being fenced in.
Sorry, bit of a long winded analogy, but it just smacks of ridiculous judiciary madness.
It would appear the trouble with a great many things is having to have everything judged by a jack of all trades.
Education - built to suit the average person, not a person as an individual
Politics - built to suit the politicians, but they'll try and sell you their ideas on an average ideal.
Law - judged on what someone/some people who can't possibly know it all think is right.
Not that it will stop it but I guess its a good thing for the whole freedom of the web thing.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)