(This is not my work. A fellow blogger, Cyberotter, who ran the older blog Donkephant blog, posted this as his farewell post there before fully migrating over to his new blog No Hat Tip. This post of his was picked up in Mike's Blog Round Up over at Crooks and Liars on or around May 6th, 2006. They also included a link to a BBC article Net Censorship Spreads Worldwide so after reading this diary, perhaps head over there and read that article as well. After reading it myself beforehand, I felt it was an important enough topic to suggest that he post this over here since there was recent talk of the Net Neutrality issue. Being that he does not currently have a DailyKos login, I have offered to post it in his place. The contents of the diary below are the work of Cyberotter.)
I, Stand Strong, hope you appreciate the contents of his diary. Any edits made by me are strictly for the purpose of clarification.)
[Update at bottom]
A friend of mine over at
Social Oracle pointed me to an interesting article detailing the UN's attempt to stop the re-broadcast of any MSM material. Let me be a little more clear, no redistribution of Main Stream Media video or audio on the Internet of any kind.
From the Inside Views column over at Intellectual Property Watch we get this disturbing news.
The proposed broadcasting treaty would create entirely new global rights for broadcasting companies who have neither created nor own the programming. What's even more alarming is the proposal from the United States that the treaty regulate the Internet transmission of audio and video entertainment.
While Net Neutrality is important and needs to be discussed, they are trying to fly this one under the radar by making it a UN treaty? I forget when do we vote on treaties in America? That's right we DON'T !
More disturbing is the far reaching effects this will have [on] my personal entertainment.
The proposal threatens the public domain since it allows broadcasting companies to fence it off, while making it illegal for the public to access what is lawfully theirs. Existing fair use rights to use copyrighted broadcasts would vanish under the treaty as well. For example, if US President Bush gave an interview to Fox News, Fox could prevent any subsequent use of that footage including fair use, commentary, or criticism of President Bush - at its sole discretion - under the new anti-circumvention rights created by this treaty. Much of the political humor available on Comedy Central's "The Jon Stewart Show" could become illegal under this treaty. Bloggers and other citizen journalists would also suffer because they would need permission to use small portions of video for news reporting, commentary or educational uses. In response, Colombia submitted a proposal that would permit circumvention to facilitate non-infringing uses of broadcasts.
No more Daily Show? My god would this be the end to Crooks and Liars as well? I'm all for Corporate America screwing me on a daily basis, but if you take away my distractions and entertainment I guess I'm just going to have to revolt. Read this next passage.
The current proposal would obligate countries to pass laws in excess of their existing obligations under TRIPS [World Trade Organization Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights]. The proposal's increase in the term of the broadcasters' rights, and its restriction of the exceptions and limitations to these rights create a significant barrier to the access to knowledge.
So those of you who still hold a small glimmer of hope that this country will not slip into a police state government...........the clock is ticking.
From 1-5 May 2006, the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights (SCCR) will hold its 14th Session in Geneva to determine the fate of the controversial Broadcasting Treaty. In its final meeting before the General Assembly votes this autumn to send it to a diplomatic conference vote.
-Dont forget to check out our new site http://nohattip.blogspot.com
(Author's Update) - Electronic Frontier Foundationhas written a briefing paper that outlines the outrageous sweeping laws that would be implicated if webcasting were to remain in the treaty.
(Stand Strong included excerpt)
...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.
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 any combination of "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. If the material is already under copyright, you would be forced to clear rights with multiple sets of rightsholders. Not only would this hurt innovation and threaten citizens' access to information, it would change the nature of the Internet as a communication medium.
...