Re: Non-negotiated contracts about to get tough global enforcement support in Hague treaty negotiations

On 6/22/05, James Love <james.love[_at_]cptech.org> wrote:
>
> ... The highly ideological UK
> delegation is pushing its "freedom on contract" position, and the US
> government position appears to be controlled by a handful of giant
> software and publishing entities that want to use take-it-or-leave-it
> contracts to write their own intellectual property rules, eliminating
> traditional limitations and exceptions to rights in patent or copyright
> laws, and also extending rights to materials in the public domain or
> owned by others. Beyond this, the strict enforcement of non-negotiated
> contracts will apply to a plethora of other transactions – basically
> anything where the seller may want to bind the buyer, through a contract
> of adhesion.

So are the people and entities that use open licenses. They have the same take-it-or-leave-it attitude as the giant entities that you are ranting about.

Moreover, these open licenses re-write intellectual property rules in some way. For example, attribution for non-visual art works is not a right in the U.S. copyright law. These open licenses add a new element by requiring people to provide attribution.

Also, don't forget about museums, historical societies, and libraries that would love to have the treaty passed so that they can enforce contracts on people who use the public domain works. (More money for them!)

You have wrong assumption that the treaty benefits only the giant entities. It could benefit much smaller entities who are able to use contracts to control the giant entities and general population. A software entity would use contract to forbid people from using its products for child pornography. In countries where laws against child pornography are non-existent or too weak, that software entity could use the contract to punish people for violating the terms and conditions in the contract.

> .... While this might make some sense for cases where
> contracts are actually negotiated, it is a terrible policy for
> non-negotiated contracts.

Naturally, I strongly detest the treaty that would restrict my freedom, regardless of whether there is any good intention in the negotiated and non-negotiated contracts.

But from the perspective of the whole world, you need to look at the other side of the coin where "good" non-negotiated contracts could gain benefit from the treaty.

Joseph Pietro Riolo
<josephpietrojeungriolo[_at_]gmail.com>
<riolo[_at_]voicenet.com>

Number of days left until 1-1-2019 when all knowledge of 1923 in the land of the U.S.A. will be freed from their copyright owners' prisons: 4,939

Public domain notice: I put all of my expressions in this post in the public domain. Received on Fri Jun 24 2005 - 00:55:00 GMT