"If aclarlo become clear that" words of Prime Minister Zapatero on all the controversy created around the draft Law on Sustainable Economy in its first final provision. This first final provision amending Law 34/2002 on Information Society and the Royal Decree 1 / 1996 on approving the revised text of the Intellectual Property Law, verbatim, to protect intellectual property against piracy on the Internet.
I read everything that they say violates and I read that final disposition and no doubt there are many dark areas:
"2 . Bodies for the adoption of measures referred to in the preceding paragraph, in order to identify the responsible service of the Information Society being done by the conduct alleged violations, may require providers of information society communication of data allowing such identification to enable him to appear in the proceedings . Providers are required to provide the information they hold. "
This rule is pretty scary as how do you identify the person responsible? Where is the line? What about privacy?
And most importantly, who will decide and on what basis? Unfortunately the latter also has an answer:
"1. be created in the Ministry of Culture, Intellectual Property Commission, as a body at national level, to exercise the functions of mediation and arbitration and to safeguard the intellectual property rights assigned by this Act . "
is the stock of the matter: a Commission established by the Ministry of Culture (government body, the Executive) who can make decisions such as closing the web pages. But what web pages? The reform says "service providers" than this, as I was clear, and I understand that service is anyone who has a website, I have searched and, according to David Bravo specializing in computer law, concerns "Any website that you get some economic return, however minimal, like a blog with advertising."
Zapatero was quick to say that will not close access to users, but the Minister of Culture has again reiterated that the decision for the Commission on Intellectual Property. And this brings us back to the key point: Can a committee appointed by a ministry close websites, access to the Internet? Can get to know a Commission on the legality of a website? Can a judge this Commission?
The answer is clear: No. danger, yes, our rights are endangered if a commission can now decide if a page is acting lawfully or not. If a committee can judge now.
is clear: the English Constitution states in Article 117. 3 that "The exercise of judicial power in all sorts of processes, ruling and having judgments executed belongs exclusively to the Courts determined by the laws, according to competition rules and procedure established therein."
It's funny that you as a condition for the Commission between a know the will of at least one of the parties, of course, a key requirement of our rights and insurance. Sure Ramoncín will think twice, "oh, I go: to the courts are very slow and with its laws and doctrines sure do not solve anything or a Commission that has been my colleague Minister expressly to protect my Copyright? "I think it's too light.
As for the discussion of piracy is something that could devote a separate post artists should they charge for every time you use or product? Journalists sell produce a text that is published and do not ever see a penny for their product, but the same text has spread in half in two, three and different media. Should not they may focus on providing (good) concert? I recently read a study saying that artists to earn more profits from the concerts with record sales, and it seemed rather curious. Besides, do not we also pay a fee?. Already pages in which artists offer free downloads, why some and not others?
But focusing again on the subject, I scale of this is that a Commission has such broad powers (to judge!) and that this is in reality to avoid the cumbersome way of the courts and the authors can see their cherished right protected more quickly, and that there is no other topics that judicial slowness is also exasperating. I scale the canon, the Commission judging and (especially) the lack of information (while some say it will not close certain sites and others say it will).
But above all, it scares me put so many barriers to Internet freedom.
Therefore I also each
Manifesto "In defense of fundamental rights on the Internet"
Given the inclusion in the Draft Sustainable Economy Act legislative changes affecting the free exercise of freedom of expression, information and the right of access to culture through the Internet, journalists, bloggers, users, professionals and Internet developers express our firm opposition to the project , and declare that ...
1 .- The copyright can not be above the fundamental rights of citizens, including the right to privacy, security, presumption of innocence, judicial protection effective and freedom of expression.
2 .- The suspension of fundamental rights is and must remain the exclusive competence of the judiciary. Not a close without trial. This blueprint, contrary to the provisions of Article 20.5 of the Constitution, put in the hands of a non-judicial body - a body under the Ministry of Culture - the power of English citizens prevent access to any website.
3 .- The new legislation will create legal uncertainty around the English technology sector, damaging one of the few areas of development and future of our economy, hindering the creation of enterprises by introducing barriers to competition and slowing its international expansion.
4 .- The new proposed legislation threatens to hinder new creators and cultural creation. With The Internet and advances in technology have democratized the creation and publication of contents of any kind, no longer come predominantly from the traditional cultural industries, but from many different sources.
5 .- The authors, like all workers are entitled to live out of their creative ideas, business models and activities associated with their creations. Trying to hold legislative changes to an outdated industry that can adapt to this new environment is neither fair nor realistic. If your business model is based on the control of the copies of the works and the Internet is not possible without violating fundamental rights, should find another model.
6 .- We believe that cultural industries need to survive modern alternatives, effective, credible and affordable to suit new social practices, rather than limitations so disproportionate as to be ineffective in that they are pursuing.
7 .- Internet should function freely and without interference from groups that seek to perpetuate outdated business models and make it impossible for human knowledge remains free.
8 .- We ask the Government to guarantee by law the net neutrality in Spain, to any pressure that may occur as a framework for developing a sustainable economy for the future.
9 .- We propose a real reform of intellectual property rights aimed at an end: return to the society of knowledge, promote the public domain and limit abuses of management entities.
10 .- In a democracy, laws and amendments should be adopted after due debate and consultation with all parties involved. It is unacceptable that legislative changes are made that affect rights fundamental organic no law that deals with other matters.
This manifesto, drawn up jointly by several authors, is all and none. If you want to join it, spread it over the Internet.
Given the inclusion in the Draft Sustainable Economy Act legislative changes affecting the free exercise of freedom of expression, information and the right of access to culture through the Internet, journalists, bloggers, users, professionals and Internet developers express our firm opposition to the project , and declare that ...
1 .- The copyright can not be above the fundamental rights of citizens, including the right to privacy, security, presumption of innocence, judicial protection effective and freedom of expression.
2 .- The suspension of fundamental rights is and must remain the exclusive competence of the judiciary. Not a close without trial. This blueprint, contrary to the provisions of Article 20.5 of the Constitution, put in the hands of a non-judicial body - a body under the Ministry of Culture - the power of English citizens prevent access to any website.
3 .- The new legislation will create legal uncertainty around the English technology sector, damaging one of the few areas of development and future of our economy, hindering the creation of enterprises by introducing barriers to competition and slowing its international expansion.
4 .- The new proposed legislation threatens to hinder new creators and cultural creation. With The Internet and advances in technology have democratized the creation and publication of contents of any kind, no longer come predominantly from the traditional cultural industries, but from many different sources.
5 .- The authors, like all workers are entitled to live out of their creative ideas, business models and activities associated with their creations. Trying to hold legislative changes to an outdated industry that can adapt to this new environment is neither fair nor realistic. If your business model is based on the control of the copies of the works and the Internet is not possible without violating fundamental rights, should find another model.
6 .- We believe that cultural industries need to survive modern alternatives, effective, credible and affordable to suit new social practices, rather than limitations so disproportionate as to be ineffective in that they are pursuing.
7 .- Internet should function freely and without interference from groups that seek to perpetuate outdated business models and make it impossible for human knowledge remains free.
8 .- We ask the Government to guarantee by law the net neutrality in Spain, to any pressure that may occur as a framework for developing a sustainable economy for the future.
9 .- We propose a real reform of intellectual property rights aimed at an end: return to the society of knowledge, promote the public domain and limit abuses of management entities.
10 .- In a democracy, laws and amendments should be adopted after due debate and consultation with all parties involved. It is unacceptable that legislative changes are made that affect rights fundamental organic no law that deals with other matters.
This manifesto, drawn up jointly by several authors, is all and none. If you want to join it, spread it over the Internet.
0 comments:
Post a Comment