![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
clocketpatchhttp://www.youvebeenowned.org/
http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/06/if-youve-ever-sold-a-used-ipod-you-may-have-violated-copyright-law/258276/
http://ownershiprights.org/kirtsaeng-vs-wiley
http://newsandinsight.thomsonreuters.com/Legal/News/ViewNews.aspx?id=45093&terms=@ReutersTopicCodes+CONTAINS+%27ANV%27
I'll leave you all to do your own reading and draw your own conclusions, but in a nutshell:
When it's digital product I understand stripping the right of resale. It doesn't mean I like it, but it makes sense given that you can essentially make unlimited copies.
But when that logic jumps onto physical objects like clothing, phones, books and CDs it stops being logic. I do not have a magic replicator. I cannot clone my possessions. However, I do occasionally accumulate too many possessions and, rather than throw them out, I like to donate stuff I don't use anymore to charity, give it to friends, or even sell it. Depending on the court decision here we all might end up living in a world where the only legal thing you'll be able to do with stuff you don't want anymore is put it in the trash. Now, this would only apply to things which were made outside of the United States, but since we live in a global economy putting this into practice means that you wouldn't be able to resell anything - including cars and houses - without getting permission from people who probably have a vested interest in not giving you permission.
And just like that, libraries, Ebay, and giving away Christmas presents all may become illegal. < at least this is how I'm interpreting the potential end results. I have no legal background and, to be totally honest, I've only really been skim reading. This is why I invite you all to read and draw your own conclusions because mine may well be wrong.
Luckily I'm not American so I can still recycle if this goes through (hurrah!). Unluckily my government has a rather monkey-see, monkey-do approach to whatever America does. Also America has a tendency to try and enforce its copy-right laws across international boundaries: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2087574/Richard-ODwyer-extradition-A-naive-British-student-facing-10-years-chains.html
So, Flisters who live in the USA, if you would be kind enough to tell your government that you think this is a stupid idea I would be much obliged.
Flisters who don't live in the USA, feel free to pass the message on and to tell your own governments not to monkey-see, monkey-do if this comes to pass
http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/06/if-youve-ever-sold-a-used-ipod-you-may-have-violated-copyright-law/258276/
http://ownershiprights.org/kirtsaeng-vs-wiley
http://newsandinsight.thomsonreuters.com/Legal/News/ViewNews.aspx?id=45093&terms=@ReutersTopicCodes+CONTAINS+%27ANV%27
I'll leave you all to do your own reading and draw your own conclusions, but in a nutshell:
When it's digital product I understand stripping the right of resale. It doesn't mean I like it, but it makes sense given that you can essentially make unlimited copies.
But when that logic jumps onto physical objects like clothing, phones, books and CDs it stops being logic. I do not have a magic replicator. I cannot clone my possessions. However, I do occasionally accumulate too many possessions and, rather than throw them out, I like to donate stuff I don't use anymore to charity, give it to friends, or even sell it. Depending on the court decision here we all might end up living in a world where the only legal thing you'll be able to do with stuff you don't want anymore is put it in the trash. Now, this would only apply to things which were made outside of the United States, but since we live in a global economy putting this into practice means that you wouldn't be able to resell anything - including cars and houses - without getting permission from people who probably have a vested interest in not giving you permission.
And just like that, libraries, Ebay, and giving away Christmas presents all may become illegal. < at least this is how I'm interpreting the potential end results. I have no legal background and, to be totally honest, I've only really been skim reading. This is why I invite you all to read and draw your own conclusions because mine may well be wrong.
Luckily I'm not American so I can still recycle if this goes through (hurrah!). Unluckily my government has a rather monkey-see, monkey-do approach to whatever America does. Also America has a tendency to try and enforce its copy-right laws across international boundaries: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2087574/Richard-ODwyer-extradition-A-naive-British-student-facing-10-years-chains.html
So, Flisters who live in the USA, if you would be kind enough to tell your government that you think this is a stupid idea I would be much obliged.
Flisters who don't live in the USA, feel free to pass the message on and to tell your own governments not to monkey-see, monkey-do if this comes to pass
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
[Also, sorry for prematurely putting you waiting on the WIP-o-Doom. I'm almost finished the last bit I didn't think I'd be writing for this section. *sighs* I will email you when it's done.]
no subject
no subject
no subject
ETA: I also signed the petition and forwarded the link to my mum, who has a whole slew of right-winger contacts that might also be outraged if they found out about this. :D Bipartisan politicking!
no subject
From what I could gather from the articles this horrible can't resell your possessions dystopia wouldn't require the laws to be rewritten to come into existence, but only depends on the court's interpretation of laws that already stand. Since the court calls this possible outcome an "absurd interpretation" I think it's hopeful that common sense will prevail.
That said... the fact that there are at least two court cases going on to decide this means that there are definitely people who would like the world to be otherwise, and the worse thing is; I can see where they're coming from too. The problem is that the implications of this interpretation will come around and bite those people and everyone else on the rear at some point and it's just an awful idea all around.
no subject
I understand why they don't want you reselling books from other countries to undercut the textbook sellers, but I disagree with them. And I was given to understand that such doing were in fact legal, although the book publishers will try to scare you into believing it's not. I've bought an imported textbook before.
I don't know what the full legal consequences would be if this goes through, but I suspect I wouldn't like them one bit. Goodness, do I hate politics.
no subject
As I said, I'm not up on the legal side of things or how to follow channels in the US. I just sort of stumbled across this yesterday and went Whut? then proceeded to find more articles (to confirm it wasn't a conspiracy theory email) went Whut? again and started wondering if people were aware of this court case.
Of course, there is so much politics going on your side of the border right now that I'm pretty sure obscure court cases are right off the radar. Good luck with that and this and everything.
no subject
Heh, yeah, thanks. We're coming up on elections right now so I'm sure everyone's more concerned with that. Right now the trending topic is how seriously Mitt Romney does or doesn't want to defund PBS, after something stupid he said about Big Bird and cutting subsidies. And I spent half an hour yesterday in a panic because my state made my absentee voter application incomprehensible, and I nearly screwed myself out of being able to register on a technicality before giving up and registering to vote where I go to school instead of where I *actually* live. I only hope 5 days is long enough for my forms to get there in the mail....
Sorry, bit of an election-year-angst info-dump there....
no subject
(I have nothing more sensible to say, then let's hope for once that common sense prevails - it would be a hugely difficult law to enforce, because even if you could track down people selling things, the negative press that would come from people closing down small businesses or chasing people who simply give something to a friend... It would be expensive and difficult.
But that's me reading your summary and not the articles. But still. Cost and consequences of actual enforcement can scupper a thing even when it gets passed.)
no subject
That even if it becomes law, it would be as difficult to enforce as jaywalking. However, piracy laws aren't very enforceable either and the current attitude seems to be Making Big Examples of the occasional random youtuber. I wouldn't be surprised if something similar were to happen with this.
So, hoping it gets scuppered. Hoping that common sense prevails. But, one good thing out of this is I think I've got the subject for this year's NaNoWrMo attempt.
no subject
LOL. Oh, well, that's okay then! :-)
(And: ooh Clocket-writing...)