I described before the three promises of the Bush Administration:
1. no content constraints
2. no ownership contraints and
3. strong new "owernship" rights of everything broadcast.
(more here http://www2.boomantribune.com/... )
Now comes an analysis of why this is important directly to the blogs:
An online culture built around user-generated content on Web sites like YouTube and MySpace would be imperiled by a new treaty, public interest groups and some technology companies said Tuesday.
That is the url for the industry analysis.
Here is the sum of the deal
Opponents say the treaty would go far beyond targeting so-called "signal piracy." They warn that it would give broadcasters and Webcasters exclusive, 50-year rights to authorize rebroadcasting of their signals, would create additional legal hoops for the average Internet user to jump through, and could shrink existing protections in U.S. law for public domain works and other instances of fair use.
What is four hours of ad revenue for endless rights over anything that goes over your waves?
Who is opposing it?
Intel - it will reduce content and demand for high quality machines
AT&T - it will reduce demand for broadband
Electronic freedom foundation - it will give the broadcasters amazing rights that will allow them to shut down sites that share video if some of that is broadcaster
and more than fifty other companies.
This is as big as the election itself. This is about an attack on the internet, freedom of information, and the democratic process.