[WEB4LIB] Re:taking prisoners in the e-book war

[Tony Barry]

At 8:13 AM -0700 24/7/01, rich at richardwiggins.com wrote:
>that conclusion.  Let's forget the digital aspect.  Suppose Harry 
>Potter had been published by a German author, and someone in 
>Australia printed a million copies in open violation of copyright.
>  If that act violates German law, and the pirate arrives on German 
>soil, then I think Germany ought to be able to arrest 'em.


Not so. But Germany would be entitled to protest to the Australian 
Government that they had signed copyright treaties and enacted 
Australian laws to put them into effect and that they, the Australian 
Government, should take action.

>
>Again, I think parts of the DMCA ought to be overturned or repealed. 
>I don't follow the argument that any law that has extraterritorial 
>reach is per se unreasonable.  It may be poor policy or bad 
>international relations, but I don't think laws with 
>extraterritorial reach are prohibited under international law.


If there is an agreed international framework based on treaties then 
we are talking international law with a local expression - but I am 
not a lawyer. This is controversial however. WTO rules are being 
attacked for overriding local legislation somewhat vigorously by a 
large number of groups for instance. Some governments, such as the 
US, are resisting the establishment of international jurisdiction 
over such things as war crimes and the greenhouse effect.

>
>As for international aspects, the DMCA was originally titled "the 
>WIPO Copyright Treaties Implementation Act."  It wasn't launched in 
>a vacuum in the US.  Here is the relevant section of the WIPO 
>copyright treaty:


Agree. But if a country haven't signed the treaty it doesn't apply 
there, and if it has been signed then it is expressed in local laws 
which apply to transgressions in that country. The details and the 
penalties may well differ.


The WTO treaty and rules preclude, with some caveats I understand, 
tariffs and local subsidy systems to protect local industries from 
international competition. Both the US and Europe heavily protect 
their agriculture from competition from more efficient producers such 
as Australia to our loss and their gain.

The rules are bent to suit local circumstances. The 
anti-globalisation protestors are seeing things like  WIPO and WTO as 
systems to protect and enrich  US and European multi-national 
companies at the expense of the the rest of the world.

But I digress and get into wider issues that the scope of this list.

Tony

Tony

-- 
phone  +61 2 6241 7659
mailto:me at Tony-Barry.emu.id.au
http://purl.oclc.org/NET/Tony.Barry