Russian President Proposes Creative Commons-Style Rules Baked Directly Into Copyright
from the interesting-move... dept
Well, this is getting interesting. Last week, we noted that Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, alone among the other G8 leaders, questioned today's copyright laws, suggesting that they did not fit with the times, and pointed out that these century-old laws don't seem to fit with today's internet. Glyn Moody now points us to the news that Medvedev appears to be going even further than just condemning today's copyright laws. He's now looking to adjust Russia's copyright laws in the other direction:In a statement released on the Kremlin's website on Thursday, Medvedev instructed the country's communications ministry to draw up amendments "aimed at allowing authors to let an unlimited number of people use their content on the basis of free licensing."This could be interesting. To be honest, I'm not sure why such things need to be baked into copyright law (as we've seen, it appears to work with it being built on top of existing copyright law -- though, some question the legality of certain CC licenses). However, what will be most interesting is to see how copyright industry lobbyists and US politicians react to this. I imagine that such a move will show up in the industry... er... I mean the USTR's annual Special 301 report as evidence as to why Russia doesn't "respect" copyright law enough.
The proposed copyright system is on a par with the initiative launched by Creative Commons, a San Francisco-based non-profit organization that has created copyright licenses that allow owners to share their content for free with certain restrictions.
But would that really be true? Does building a more flexible, more modern copyright law really mean a lack of respect for copyright? Why wouldn't it mean a healthy respect for building a system that matches better with the times -- rather than the industry's kneejerk reaction to just keep ratcheting up the punishments, enforcements and coverage of copyright?
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
Filed Under: copyright, creative commons, dmitry medvedev, russia
Companies: creative commons
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
*Delete as appropriate.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Redo
We need to scrap copyright, patent, and trademark law and start from scratch. With all of the loopholes, barnyard backdoors and out of touch realities within, it'd be far easier to make these three laws have similar uses with today's technology.
We know that trademark law has a "use it or lose it" clause that people seem to take far too literally.
Patent law is so ridiculous that we can make a patent on how to tie our shoes.
Copyright law... RIAA. Nuf said.
We already have the economic data that proves we don't *need* copyright. We would arguably have MORE innovation in the workplace without having to check up on patent law, or trademarks for other competitors. The government enforced monopoly is only making copyright look more ridiculous because it can not POSSIBLY regulate a person's behavior.
If we could start over, there would be better ways to find out what would need copyright. Arguably, software doesn't need copyright to compete. Neither does music or movies, when companies can make their own distribution models that work to serve customers, not their own entitlements.
Do we need modern copyright law? Based on most of the evidence, the answer is no. We need people to figure out for themselves what the internet can allow, and make it work for them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Redo
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Redo
So why wouldn't they in the future?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Redo
When you say 'protection', I suddenly get this image of guys in suits, slicked back hair, a smirk on their face, as they rob old grandmothers of their social security money...
Oh goodness, I'm having a flashback!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Redo
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Redo
I would hate to think about the pace and type of innovation we could see if the IP leash was taken off of people and industry. As innovate as the US is today, if we really want to compete in the global marketplace in the long term, we better lose the leashes we have tethered ourselves too. If other countries were smart, they would let us tie ourselves up in knots while they innovate like mad.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Redo
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
(Irony isn't lost on me considering that [i]now[/i] the US looks like the repressive bad guys with the collapsing economy and Russia looks like the goodie-goodie economic upstarts pushing for more liberties)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ugh...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Making sense
Dmitry Medvedev may be on to something here that could change some dynamics. To be honest, I'm not sure I really see that much of a difference between the RIAA and the Russian mob any more these days. Whatever the outcome, it could finally inject a little good old fashioned competition into the world economy. Those poor suckers like me at the bottom could use a little help.
That said, the only politicians that are worth watching are those that follow through on their words no matter how crazy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Register for Copyright
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Register for Copyright
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Darn Commies....
All your base are belong to us...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
US(SR)A
If only USA would look at Russia and see how you should respond to the encroachment of our rights by unscrupulous businesses and overeager governments.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
So this would mean that Russia would be considered to be, like, a sort of enemy of the USA?
Yes, I can see how that would bother them ...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
You don't have to change the laws to accept what is already legal. This sounds like another run of Russian let them eat cake logic. They aren't producers, they are consumers, and consumer friendly laws are good to keep the masses quiet and in line.
Are you going to make another appearance on Russian TV to support this one, comrade?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
What Russia is proposing is Domain as part of a larger copyright model.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
There is never an issue where someone would not know that a work is copyright. Rather, they can only show where a license has been granted.
When you start to have different domains and works could be in any one of them, you open up for the legal defence of not knowing that something was copyright, or that it was covered. It would be something that would pretty much cause copyright to collapse, further shifting the burden onto rights holders to try to prove their legal rights at every turn. Most would just give up.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Simple?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Having a system that starts with two roads is the start of confusion. "I swear judge, I thought Star Wars Episode 19 was in the public domain!". Having a system where the copyright holder can renounce the copyright or declare and open, non-revokable, free license for the copyright life of the item makes for a system that people can more easily understand.
Confusion is the realm of those who want to upset the system.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
What your argument is trying to imply is that copyright won't work if the public domain were considered first. This has never been the case. In fact, all evidence of removing a copyright system shows more robustness than one where you're locking up sources.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
You know all that CC-BY-SA license stuff? That wouldn't even need to exist. You could just distribute it with, "I waive the copyright" on it, and that's that. That doesn't exist right now....anywhere. At all. Thanks to the bizarreness that is TRiPs.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
... oh wait thats the way it used to be.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Creative Commies
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Some insights for Russia
Resistance is fierce. Usually, when there is some kind of conference or roundtable, people from big content do not hesitate to call internet companies thieves. Same with CC licenses: "you want to make everything free!! How content producers will make money??". We have RAO - licensing organization that is famous for such acts as: suing artists for singing their own songs at concerts without permision; suing barber shops, car washs etc. There was a case, where they threatened to sue WW2 veterans for singing was songs in public. And artists have no clue where this licensing money actually goes. RIAA accounting at it's best. We also have "cd tax" which actually applied for any device that can play music! No safe harbors or anything like that. And both big content and FSB often tries to sneak new Internet regulating laws which would harm companies and users greatly.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Creative Commons.
Creative Commons rights do need to be respected and enforced and it's easier to reference a law than it is to challenge an abuse of the CC license in court - something I would find difficult to do.
David.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
free distribution licences need support in law
[ link to this | view in chronology ]