‘Exaggerated copyright warnings’
p2pnet news | freedom:- “Certain copyright-holding corporations” are misrepresenting consumer rights by using “exaggerated copyright warnings,” says the Computer and Communication Industry Association (CCIA).
Having levelled the charge, the CCIA wants the FTC (Federal Trade Commission) to, “find that certain companies are engaged in a pattern of unfair and deceptive trade practices in threatening consumers with criminal and civil penalties,” says a statement.
The CCIA says these kinds of warnings, “materially misrepresent the constitutional and statutory copyright obligations of consumers”.
Many copyright warnings, “ignore consumer fair use rights and should be modified to reflect the true rights of consumers who lawfully acquire audio and video content,” says Gary Shapiro, president and CEO of the CEA (Consumer Electron
ics Association), adding, “it is essential that all stakeholders accurately educate consumers about our obligations - and our rights - under copyright law.”
Click on the microphone on the right to hear this story. If you’d like to do a p2pnetcast, just pick a post that hasn’t been done and send the results to p2pnet @ shaw dot ca. You have an accent? No problem 
Also See:
CCIA - CEA Comments On FTC Complaint Against Copyright Owner Misrepresentation of Consumer Rights, August 1, 2007
Use free p2pnet newsfeeds for your site. It’s really easy!
Subscribe to p2pnet.net | | rss feed: http://p2pnet.net/p2p.rss | | Mobile - http://p2pnet.net/index-wml.php
Net access blocked by government restrictions? Use Psiphon from the Citizen Lab at the University of Toronto. Go here for details. Download here.
August 5th, 2007 at 6:35 am
THE PROBLEM IS THE LAW: IT SAYS NOTHING
The american Copyright Act was made by a comitee of asses and then mofied by more such cmittes, led by a bunch of lobbyists.
It is incredible that the Act makes no mention of the copyright information that should be published with the various kinds of works. As a result we have all sorts of warrnings selected to scare customers while keeping the competition in the dark.
Right now books are being published that will soon be in the public domain and that fact is not mentioned. For example, the works of a book or song author who died in 1948 will go into the public domain in 2008 but the publisations do not mention that fact. Well, the law should say that publishers must specify when a work goes into the public domain, so the public knows when copies can be freely made.
How about requiring this copyright sysmbol on a work that enters the public domain in 2008? ©P2008.
Of course the intention is to keep the public in the dark as to the law and the more important jurisprudence and as to the public domain facts.
The law should also allow for economic penalties (return of profits?) for claiming and licensing copyrights in public domain works, copyfraud. A very common fraud. A pattern of fraud, as found in the music publishing industry, should result in criminal acusation.
Also the the publication of copyright related legal advise there the attorney giving such advise cannot be identified, or where the advise travels beyond the area where the attorney can practice should be made illegal in the Copyright Act.
Its time that legislators start taking their work seriously. Its time to flip the warnings and warn the publishers and not their costumer.
BTW, the FBI should get out of the warning business. Not always, but at times it is aid and comfort to crooks. It looks so bad, particularly when the warning travels to foreign countries along with the product. It only reinforces the view that America is the bully of the world.
August 5th, 2007 at 6:08 pm
agreed, why shall we in Norway (the little contry north in europ with the big bank accunt) get an FBI warning. maybe a CIA warning, but not a FBI warning… and yah i do not have anything agenst americans, but i hate that legal system of yours (cus it’s spreding)