Free File Sharing On Political Platforms? Pandering To Young Voters Or Serious Policy Position?
from the seems-a-bit-desperate dept
Slashdot points us to an article about the relatively small Liberal Party of Norway is including some interesting positions on its platform concerning copyright issues. Specifically, it wants to make sure that free file sharing for non-commercial purposes is legal, it wants to allow sampling, it wants to shorten the length of copyright and finally, it wants to ban DRM. The statements backing these up point to the importance of having a free flow of culture and how that these changes will help spread culture more easily through the country. Of course, being a relatively small political party, this has the feel of a somewhat desperate attempt to appeal to younger voters. Also, while I tend to agree with many of the positions, it's not clear how well the policy makers in question actually understand what they're suggesting here. Banning DRM, for example, doesn't actually make that much sense. While we think DRM is bad for everyone the real effort should be in convincing the content owners who insist on using DRM that it's harming their business prospects by limiting their market potential. Doing an outright ban just seems to be going too far. Also, in terms of encouraging free file sharing, they should be pointing out how such things can expand someone's market (making it a true win-win) rather than acting like it's a some sort of tradeoff between the consumer and the producer of content. We're all for artificial monopolies on ideas through intellectual property laws becoming a point of political debate, but the understanding of what it entails needs to go even further than what's being presented by the Liberal Party of Norway.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
i.e. Forcing women to get a sonogram right before an abortion somewhat helps the pro-life cause (I am looking at you shameless Republicans in Georgia)
or an assult weapons ban that merely changes the way the end of an assult rifle looks (I'm looking at you Mr. Clinton)
I am picking on both parties to hide my preference of which party I prefer. My point is they both do stupid crap that will change NOTHING!
If they are serious about file sharing and they plan on acting on it if and when they get some power - put it on every ad you buy!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
If DRM is bad for everyone, why is banning it ''going too far"?
Plainly, the content producers have gone too far (killing fair use) by using shallow simplistic arguments.
If only the simplest of arguments will be understood, then my argument is, "kill DRM".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
hmmm...a bit too extreme
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Proportional Representation
[ link to this | view in chronology ]