james g wrote:
I suggest we spin off fair use, with copyright coverage for derived works, into a separate thread, take that to the vote promptly, and put the issues here to the vote as soon as the vote on fair use is closed.
I can agree to separate it out, though I would suggest we move on rather than do yet another thread on copyright just yet.
Okay. For the other issues:
- [A] No policy
- [B] Unrestricted personal use of a legally obtained work (format shifting, backups, etc. allowed, EULAS don't apply)
- [C] Not illegal to personally obtain or use a work without permission or payment (but conveying is still illegal)
- [D] Conveying allowed if neither money nor P2P bandwidth is received for conveying ('mix tapes' for friends, etc. allowed)
- [E] Conveying allowed if money is not received for conveying (P2P allowed)
- [F] Conveying allowed and profit may be made through advertising
- [G] Conveying allowed and copies may be sold to cover costs
- [H] No restrictions (profit may be made through advertising or sales of copies, etc.)
Use by non-profit organisations:
- [I] No policy
- [J] No restriction on use beyond per-user licensing (format shifting, backups, etc. allowed, EULAS don't apply)
- [K] Not illegal to obtain or use a work without permission or payment
Conveying by non-profit organisations:
- [L] No policy
- [M] Conveying allowed if neither money nor P2P bandwidth is received for conveying
- [N] Conveying allowed if money is not received for conveying (P2P allowed)
- [O] Conveying allowed and profit may be made through advertising
- [P] Conveying allowed and copies may be sold to cover costs
- [Q] No restrictions on conveying (profit may be made through advertising or sales of copies, etc.)
I've amended wording to hopefully make things clearer. I've taken out the stuff about inspiration, because I put it in based on one of Edison Carter's posts, but I'm now not sure he thinks it needs to be voted on at this stage. I've taken out the stuff about punishment, because it's outside the scope of the question. And I've added a couple more options, because reading back through the thread, I think I've finally clicked on what Pervach was talking about with regards to large vs. small scale copying.
Are people happy to put the above to the vote shortly?
Here is [EDIT: a link to] a summary of other pirate party's positions on non-commercial conveying and coverage of derivative works
(linked) from further back in the thread.
Issues raised in this thread but not addressed at this stage (for later consideration):
- How copyright applies to inspiration as opposed to copying
- Fair use (e.g. similar to USA law)
- Excluding copyright cover on derived works (perhaps as an aspect of fair use)
- Judgement and punishment (e.g. Skynet)
My personal views on the current issues [EDIT: the issues to be voted on soon, listed at the top of this post, not the issues listed in the paragraph above]:
The Pirate Party of Sweden has been involved in P2P, so it may show a lack of solidarity to not aim to legalise this, at least for individuals. It also seems to me to be an issue that the the Pirate Party of Sweden has managed to gather support from. I don't think there's any need (or any significant benefit) in going any further than this though. P2P conveying is IMO a sufficient method of non-commercial conveying, and only needs to be legal for individuals in order to work. (As I understand it, sites like the Pirate Bay provide indexes of hash files, but don't actually convey works, so do not require it to be legal to receive money for conveying or for it to be legal for organisations to convey works, they only depend on it being legal to provide indexes of hash files.) Allowing people to receive money for conveying would, IMO, likely risk opposition from artists such as in the Creative Freedom Foundation
who may otherwise be sympathetic to our position.
[EDIT: Could others also summarise their views on the current issues?]