Copyright Reform Wont Happen For At Least 30 Years But, It Will Happen

The chain will break. It is not needed anymore so it can only last so long

Photo Credit: .Bala

It would be naive to believe that the type of copyright reform we as modern artists and consumers need to benefit us will happen very soon. The incumbents, the record label associations in every country such as the RIAA in America and ARIA here in Australia, simply wont let it happen. They unfortunately have the lobbying power required to drive more protectionist change to the already overreaching law.

Until they have moved on (being it in their careers or otherwise), they will fight feverently. We must too. But we must recognise the money held by these organisations and, accept the fact that it will take time.

When their era is up (read they retire, etc) then our era can truly begin.

Until then, we a the new generation living under the older generations outdated rules.

Overstepping their mark?

If the thought of every country in the world adopting harsher more protective copyright laws isn't bad enough, don't forget that they are all tied together through the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry more commonly know as the IFPI. As such, they can co-ordinate their efforts significantly.

When you think about it, kicking someone off their connection will do little to conform them to big contents ideals, instead it's more likely to enrage them.

Their most current push a Three-Strikes-Law, is currently being debated in just about every country where the IFPI's slimy tentacles reach.

The law proposes that an internet subscriber (such as yourself) could be kicked off the internet (yes kicked off) after three warnings.

The clincher is that the warnings need only be mere accusations.

The burden of proof is so minimal, and so flimsy (remember spoofing IP addresses is easier than riding a bike to the shops). Aside from being spoofed, IP addresses are a very weak method to trace a subscriber.

In short, the IP address is not 100% accurate to the person suspected of belonging to it. And, there is current legal precedent in some countries dictating that an IP address alone is not enough to convict someone.

At least, thats what the IFPI were planning for.

Naturally such a radical and ultimately authoritarian approach to copyright has been met with intense scrutiny.

A justified backlash?

Over at TechDirt, Mike Masnick has made sure to point out the ridiculousness of the proposed law, "... honestly, the biggest issue is that he fails to address the huge question that I keep asking, and which no one wants to answer:

 How will kicking people off the internet get them to buy more product? That's because there is no answer.

Will it make some people participate less in file sharing?"

When you think about it, kicking someone off their connection will do little to conform them to big contents ideals, instead it's more likely to enrage them.

The Open Rights Group's YouGov poll showed that disconnection is a clear vote loser in the polls.

"We know why the government has been persuaded to go down this disastrous path, but we’re not ready to let our rights be sacrificed. 

The right to freedom of expression, a fair trial, to be presumed innocent until proven guilty: and for proportionate punishments, these are basic principles on which democratic societies are built."

Back in March Michael Geist reported on how, just days after being dropped by New Zealand, the European Parliament rejected the proposal for a Three-Strikes-Law. Clearly, this is not a favourable option to anyone but big content.

But as much as we fight this change, it will not result in all out reform. Even when the currently proposed change (three-strikes) is so incredibly unpopular around the world.

The EU recently recognised internet access as a fundamental human right (and yes, that is a very big deal). So at best we can prevent such human rights atrocities as the Three-Strikes-Law from being implemented around the world.

How it will happen

I fear we must wait, and realise the enormity of the task ahead. But, that's not to say ignore the problem copyright currently shoves in everyones face.

We need to simplify the debate, and educate the public

We must keep debating this.

It needs to stay in the headlines.

But we need to clear them up.

Simplify the debate.

Currently headlines are full of misinformation and FUD (Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt) with "facts" stating how much money was lost to file sharing.

There are only a few ways the law will be completely reformed. It may take 30 years, or even more. But rest assured I am convinced it will happen.

When the incumbents either collapse in on themselves, like many labels owned by majors already are, or simply become so distanced from reality, then the law can change.

When the lobbyists and their multimillions behind them either leave politics or have their funds dry up, then the law can change.

The third option however is my favourite. Because when we reach the third option, society can move on.

When public opinion, which is already shifting quickly and heavily, finally rejects the ridiculous claims by lobbyists, then the law can change.

When the younger generation grows up and the balance of public opinion shifts in favour of the advancement of culture and humanity, as opposed to the advancement of corporate content.

The point is simply this, we can't change a law that million dollar businesses are currently still relying on as their sole source of income - however immoral that law is becoming. The 

Until public opinion grows enough to recognise the irrelevance of the law, and/or when these businesses collapse, at best we can, and we should, prevent them from removing too many of our freedoms.