Party Vibe

Register

Welcome To

A proposal to restrict video and audio links

Forums Life Politics, Media & Current Events A proposal to restrict video and audio links

  • This topic is empty.
Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 5 (of 5 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • this has been defeated this time round but perhaps we should all take note of the issue and keep an eye on it

    it was proposed by the US and will no doubt be back in the not too distant future and will make audio and video links a thing of the past if it is passed

    check this article:

    http://www.boingboing.net/2006/05/02/un_cooking_podcastki.html

    and this site:

    http://www.eff.org/IP/WIPO/

    :rant::rant::rant:

    FFS youtube may infringe IP regs to an extent and there is loads of copyright material on there but the high-compression footage looks worse than 4th generation VHS or Chinese pirate VCDs and AFAIK cannot easily be extracted into editing or copying programmes, its hardly much use to professional pirates..

    Also if this passes it potentially means we have to license our radio station with Ofcom and be subject to full relevant legislation (i.e keeping programme logs and tapes, copyright returns etc)

    the point of the proposed legislation was that anything you posted up on [eg youtube or Yahoo video or] any site like that would no longer be under your copyright; the copyright would pass to the holding site and you would need their permission to copy or link to it:crazy:

    it would apply to audio and video equally and would pass the copyright to the site owner [ normal copyright or creative commons copyright equally:scared:]

    in effect you post up your home video or your tune on any site and thenceforth to use it again you would have to ask their permission despite the fact you created it – it would become their property :pee:[ i am thinking youttube, myspace, yahoo video, etc etc]

    and you would possibly have to pay to link to it as well:pee:

    the ramifications are hideous

    raj wrote:
    the point of the proposed legislation was that anything you posted up on [eg youtube or Yahoo video or] any site like that would no longer be under your copyright; the copyright would pass to the holding site and you would need their permission to copy or link to it:crazy:

    it would apply to audio and video equally and would pass the copyright to the site owner [ normal copyright or creative commons copyright equally:scared:]

    in effect you post up your home video or your tune on any site and thenceforth to use it again you would have to ask their permission despite the fact you created it – it would become their property :pee:[ i am thinking youttube, myspace, yahoo video, etc etc]

    and you would possibly have to pay to link to it as well:pee:

    the ramifications are hideous

    this makes me very suspicious now. Who would lobby for such a law, other than the people funding all these “user-content created” networks, trying to recover their costs?

    old media did this before 10 years ago when the first affordable but reasonable quality analogue camcorders made it easier to get “DIY/activist video” – they basically exploited it for cheap footage, cherry picked what they wanted for a pittance and gave no airspace to the rest.

    btw murdochspaces small print already means you grant Newscorp a license to reuse your content however they please (including potentially re-editing it) as a condition for making use of their service.

    And Ofcom/EU are still debating on how to best regulate online media content.

    General Lighting wrote:
    this makes me very suspicious now. Who would lobby for such a law, other than the people funding all these “user-content created” networks, trying to recover their costs?

    btw murdochspaces small print already means you grant Newscorp a license to reuse your content however they please (including potentially re-editing it) as a condition for making use of their service.

    And Ofcom/EU are still debating on how to best regulate online media content.

    you can be sure the lobby groups in favour include exactly those people you suspect

    and if it goes through at any point they will be able to recover those costs and more; altruism in setting up these kinds of networks is non-existent and now the hidden agenda is being revealed:bad_idea:

    their hope will be that by the time that the law is enacted people will think these ‘social’ networks are indispensible and be prepared to sell their souls to be able to keep using them
    [ a bit like mobile phones which can be used to triangulate your position to within 15m unless you take the battery out of them; how many people are aware of this loss of privacy and would be prepared to keep using the phones regardless of it?]

0

Voices

3

Replies

Tags

This topic has no tags

Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 5 (of 5 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Forums Life Politics, Media & Current Events A proposal to restrict video and audio links