Article 3(1) of Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society must be interpreted as meaning that the embedding, by means of the technique of framing, in a third party website page, of works that are protected by copyright and that are freely accessible to the public with the authorisation of the copyright holder on another website, where that embedding circumvents measures adopted or imposed by that copyright holder to provide protection from framing, constitutes a communication to the public within the meaning of that provision.
This ruling closes a lot of doors between people.
It seems to me – increasingly – that what WAS about people wrongly monetising other people’s copyright, IS becoming SOLY about HOW to protect and exploit rights. I do realize that the legal systems and its defenders of the wronged replace open bloodshed of hence, but it is also a system eating away at the very necessary core of humanity: the ability to share information in order to deal with circumstance. And even if original thought does exist in more cases than simple ideal, the legal ownership of all patents and inventions and techniques and content and logos and brands and so on are building up to a Globe being darkened by long and short black border lines criss-crossing in every which direction to encompass and stifle the whole by preventing trespass without toll.
Continue reading “The logic to species advancement of PRISON.”
Control of immaterial objects ALSO confers power – and maybe more so!
excerpts: They are pushing for laws that introduce identifiability, even for historic records… This is data that used to be absolutely forbidden to store for privacy reasons. The copyright industry has managed to flip that from “forbidden” to “mandatory”.
They are pushing for laws that introduce liability on all levels. A family of four may be sued into oblivion by an industry cartel in a courtroom where presumption of innocence doesn’t exist (a civil proceeding)
They are pushing for laws that introduce wiretapping of entire populations – and suing for the right to do it before it becomes law. Also, they did it anyway without telling anybody.
They are pushing for laws that send people into exile, cutting off their ability to function in society, if they send the wrong things in sealed letters.
They are pushing for active censorship laws that we haven’t had in well over a century, using child pornography as a battering ram (in a way that directly causes more children to be abused, to boot).
They are pushing for laws that introduce traceability even for the pettiest crimes, which specifically includes sharing of culture (which shouldn’t be a crime in the first place). In some instances, such laws even give the copyright industry stronger rights to violate privacy than that country’s police force. (!!!)
With these concepts added together, they may finally – finally! – be able to squeeze out our freedom of speech and other fundamental rights, all in order to be able to sustain an unnecessary industry.