EUCD alarm (Re: EUCD in Portugal)

[João Miguel Neves]

The problem is that our law is a diff to the Copyright Code, which, in
itself, has 212 articles. This law project changes most of it. I don't
have, nor know anyone that has, the ability to translate all this to
another language without commiting huge mistakes. I'll handle this
tonight (I'm warming up the coffee pot). What's the situation in France
? How long do you have to comment on this ?

On Wed, 2002-12-04 at 20:10, Loic Dachary wrote:
> 	Hi,
> 
> 	If this portugese implementation is mature enough and close to
> acceptable, we definitely need an english version of it for
> inspiration. French protest regarding the current EUCD law project is
> being translated (Vincent Caron centralizes effort). A pressbook is
> available at
> http://www.planetelibre.net/article/index.php?article=CSPLA. If it has
> the expected effect we will be in great need of valuable proposals to
> improve the situation. There should be a "how to implement 2001/29/CE
> without harming everyone" manual ;-)
> 
> 	Is someone feeling like writing a press release summarizing
> the current situation all over Europe and ring the bell world wide ?
> Accurate information is centralized at
> http://wiki.ael.be/index.php/EUCD-Status. Best content available at
> http://ukcdr.org/issues/eucd/.
> 
> 	Cheers,
> 
> João Miguel Neves writes:
>  > On Wed, 2002-12-04 at 19:12, Loic Dachary wrote:
>  > > 	Could you please expand ? I'm not sure I understand. Do you mean
>  > > that the portuguese implementation of EUCD is acceptable according to you, 
>  > > except for "access control" ? 
>  > 
>  > I've not ready thouroughly yet. About the portuguese version what I've
>  > seen is:
>  > - Almost all exceptions are implemented.
>  > - There is a process defined if the vendor doesn't supply unprotected
>  > versions for legal uses.
>  > - TPMs around software are not protected by law.
>  > - It says that protections shouldn't impair legal uses.
>  > - Take-down clause has been transformed for general law and is
>  > implemented through court injuctions (In Portugal this means you'll have
>  > the right to be heard before any action is taken).
>  > 
>  > This is why I said this is probably the best implementation we could
>  > have hoped for. As far as I can see what we should fight for:
>  > 
>  > - Getting the law to say that TPM can't impede legal uses.
>  > 
>  > The main question regarding Free Software continues to be how do you
>  > know if an implementation is legal or not ? What's the difference
>  > between a player and a FS player ?
>  > 
>  > I still need to read it thoroughly. If you need information on what to
>  > look for, I got an e-mail earlier about the discussion around EUCD in
>  > Belgium.
-- 
João Miguel Neves <joao at silvaneves.org>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.fsfe.org/pipermail/discussion/attachments/20021205/627d53d0/attachment.sig>