Text 28731, 65 rader
Skriven 2015-10-18 15:59:18 av Michiel van der Vlist (2:280/5555)
     Kommentar till en text av Joe Delahaye (55709.fidonews)
Ärende: Saboteur of Fidonews
============================
Hello Joe,

On Sunday October 18 2015 09:52, you wrote to me:

 MV>> So what you'r saying is that you can wipe your ass with the laws
 MV>> of the country where the publication originated and (re)publish
 MV>> it without permission because the laws of your own country allow
 MV>> it?

 JD> It is not being (re)published, only delivered a diferent method.

"different method" is exactly what makes it a "new publication" even if it were
done by the same party.

An illustrating example is distributing TV over cable in addition to over the
air. In the beginning TV was only distributed over the air. Owners of a TV paid
"kijk- and luistergeld". Then came cable. Exactly the same content was
distributed simultaneously over the air and via cable. A TV displays the
content received via the air or via the cable. But not at the same time. The
POV from the customer was that he had already paid for watching the content.
But the court ruled in favour of the content providers who claimed that
distribution via cable instead of via the air is a "new publication" that
requires separate negotiation of rights. That was upheld by the Dutch supreme
court and so now I pay extra to the cable company for the rights that they have
to pay to the content providers for distributing via the cable. Despite the
fact that  already pay for the same content that is distributed over the air.

 JD> If I send a printed copy, via mail, is that also against Dutch or EU
 JD> laws? After all it is now on paper instead of digital.

And the latter is exactly what makes it a new publication that requires renewed
permission. Yes, it is against Dutch law to do so without permission..

 MV>> You may have a point.

 JD> I think so.

 MV>> But then why the uproar when Björn put pictures of old playmates
 MV>> on his website? Why was he demonised for not following US law? If
 MV>> you guys are only bound by the laws of your own country, why does
 MV>> that not apply to Björn too?

 MV>> Or is this yet another case of double standards?

 JD> It is a different type of standard to be sure.  On the one hand, the
 JD> US tries to extend its laws into the rest of the world (and that is
 JD> not made up), but on the other it wont recognize laws from other
 JD> countries.

Eaxactly. IOW double standards!

 JD>   US Copyright law, seems to be the end all be all, and soon
 JD> (if ratified), it will be the law of the world, when the TPP comes
 JD> into effect.

I am against TTIP. The main reason is that I do not trust the US Americans. We
will get the short end of the stick. The minute a dispute arises, they will
interpret the rules in their own advantage and force that interpretation on us
by right of might. As they have done with Fidonet and still try to do.


Cheers, Michiel

--- GoldED+/W32-MSVC 1.1.5-b20130111
 * Origin: Rheb genfu cnpvsvfg cvt fuvg chffl (2:280/5555)