Prohibition of private copying?

Discussion about the EU legislation on the protection of intellectual property

In the legal margin of the European Parliament, the copyright directive is now negotiated to give recommendations for the tuning provided for the next month in plenary. A group of 400 musicians under the name "Artists Unite for Strong Copyright" occur, has already filed a petition at the European Parliament in order to better protect intellectual property by casting and better protection measures against illegal copying.

Copyright injuries are intended to make millions of losses in the music industry, with currently websites offering music with the standard MP3 for downloading, in the center of criticism. "We do not criticize the internet", Says the French musician Jean-Michel Jarre, who survived the petition, "But we believe that there are reasonable protection measures." For the politicians of the European Parliament, the date had come to take a posture and to ensure that the Art Copyright regulations allow the European artists and musicians to be successful in the digital age.

The new directive formulated by the EU Commission is controversial due to some points. The main discussion will be whether the private copying should continue to be allowed. The directive sees certain exceptions for "Duplication actions" before, which can be made by the Member States themselves. In addition to the chagrin of some musicians, artists and, above all, the music industry multiples on sound, image or audiovisual Trag "Through a natural person for private use for non-commercial purposes" or "Certain variety of multiplications without direct or indirect economic or commercial benefits made by public libraries, museums or other institutions accessible from the Office." This is to allow the individual states to make their mechanisms for the securities of private copying or the duties for photocopies and empty cassette, audio and video recorder etc. maintain.

The International Federation of the Phonographic Industry, however, believes that now, where one can digitize and convey content in analogue times, no more exceptions should be allowed. printed out, this was possible to run on a ban to record a television program, for example with the video recorder. Criticism is consistently consistently on the technical temporary storage of data. The guideline suggests that it is for "Certain technical multiplication actions caused by the technology used, but have no economic importance (such as memory copies arising from Internet transfer) a binding exception" be. At least that were also the providers wanted to allow others to allow only one exception if this has been permitted by the copyright holders.

Of course, if a stakeholders of intellectual property, which considers every user, is in principle to be used as a pirated copy, ultimately use the industry and the owners of intellectual property. If the artists attract the same strand, such as the music industry, they will also take advantage of the opportunities to use the Internet in their own interest and independently of the coarse companies. Every kind of "Terminator technology" For digital media or in biotechnology, which only permits one-time use and prevent any further use, also the dissemination hindrance. In addition to stronger protection of intellectual property, one should once again be dealing with, whether there is also a right of the general public in spiritual content. This is what this shows the controversial exemptions, but under a strong commercialization and privatization could also suffer culture, training and science – and thus back the primary resource of the knowledge society through a shortage.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *