Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 8th Feb 2013 02:02 UTC
Legal "This means that people can no longer get convicted for violating the copyright monopoly alone. The court just declared it illegal for any court in Europe to convict somebody for breaking the copyright monopoly law when sharing culture, only on the merits of breaking the law. A court that tries somebody for violating the copyright monopoly must now also show that a conviction is necessary to defend democracy itself in order to convict. This is a considerably higher bar to meet." Well, that's progress, I guess.
Thread beginning with comment 551853
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Interesting
by WorknMan on Fri 8th Feb 2013 02:46 UTC
WorknMan
Member since:
2005-11-13

I wonder how far-reaching this will be. People seem to be all gung-ho for sharing, until some business wants to share information about its customers to advertisers, and then suddenly sharing is evil. Can you really be 'pro file sharing' on one hand, and then demand that your right to privacy be respected on the other, as it pertains to information that companies are allowed to share about you?

IMHO, I don't know about this being a 'human right', but I do think it's a good decision. It's time to stop pretending that shit which is infinitely copyable should not be copied. Even if it kills entire industries, it's a step backward to think you can put information/content 'out there' and expect it to remain under your control, unless you encrypt it. (And even then, you better be damn sure that the intended recipients won't share it either.) It would be a bit hypocritical though for people to think that sharing only applies to information they WANT to have shared. Either sharing is good, or it isn't. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

Reply Score: 4

RE: Interesting
by WereCatf on Fri 8th Feb 2013 03:05 in reply to "Interesting"
WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

Private conduct is not a copyrighted works and is not produced with the intent that other people consume it, so your comparison between copyrighted works and details about private conduct is inherently flawed. A copyrighted work is created intentionally by you whereas tracking data is created from you simply being yourself and is even not produced by you yourself.

Reply Parent Score: 7

RE[2]: Interesting
by WorknMan on Fri 8th Feb 2013 03:29 in reply to "RE: Interesting"
WorknMan Member since:
2005-11-13

Private conduct is not a copyrighted works and is not produced with the intent that other people consume it, so your comparison between copyrighted works and details about private conduct is inherently flawed.


Not really, since they have two things in common:

1. There are people that want to share the information with each other
2. There are other people who wish not to have this information shared

Technology does not discriminate based on intent, so it doesn't matter WHY it came into being, and who the intended recipients were is really irrelavent. Either you're going to allow sharing wholesale, or you're not. And really, it's futile to try and prevent it; that would be kind of like pissing into the wind.

Edited 2013-02-08 03:30 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE: Interesting
by tylerdurden on Fri 8th Feb 2013 03:45 in reply to "Interesting"
tylerdurden Member since:
2009-03-17

Are you seriously trying to establish an equivalence between "sharing" and "profiting from?"

Reply Parent Score: 6

RE[2]: Interesting
by WorknMan on Fri 8th Feb 2013 05:25 in reply to "RE: Interesting"
WorknMan Member since:
2005-11-13

Are you seriously trying to establish an equivalence between "sharing" and "profiting from?"


If you're sharing something that came from somebody else, and they have explicitly asked you NOT to share it with others, does the fact that you're not profiting from it somehow make it excusable?

And what if you're trading for something with somebody else? Isn't that technically profiting?

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: Interesting
by Soulbender on Fri 8th Feb 2013 04:12 in reply to "Interesting"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

People seem to be all gung-ho for sharing, until some business wants to share information about its customers to advertisers, and then suddenly sharing is evil.


These are two completely different things. A work that is designed to be displayed to the public at large is significantly different from your personal information.

Edited 2013-02-08 04:12 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 6

RE[2]: Interesting
by WorknMan on Fri 8th Feb 2013 05:20 in reply to "RE: Interesting"
WorknMan Member since:
2005-11-13

These are two completely different things. A work that is designed to be displayed to the public at large is significantly different from your personal information.


Don't you mean 'A work that is designed to be display to people who pay for it? In other words, a work that was designed to be shared ONLY WITH CERTAIN PEOPLE, just like personal information.

Edited 2013-02-08 05:21 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2