and it can be important alos for another reason, for anybody : there are several cases of songs / pieces and so on that really made the boom after the death of the author. Would that be fair that the big companies could make money on that easily, without paying a dime ?

It's true that some actions are more targeted to “Mr Anyone” than to the techy professionals. That's like drug fighting : scare the ones who use it, and fight the producers with other ways. But you need to scare the users also…

At the end, it's true the majors did not find the appropriate way to deal with this new technologies, and a re just starting to experiment new solutions. But the ones who suffered most were not the majors, they were the artists.

and it can be important alos for another reason, for anybody : there are several cases of songs / pieces and so on that really made the boom after the death of the author. Would that be fair that the big companies could make money on that easily, without paying a dime ?

It’s true that some actions are more targeted to “Mr Anyone” than to the techy professionals. That’s like drug fighting : scare the ones who use it, and fight the producers with other ways. But you need to scare the users also…

At the end, it’s true the majors did not find the appropriate way to deal with this new technologies, and a re just starting to experiment new solutions. But the ones who suffered most were not the majors, they were the artists.

I think most deeply involved with copyright, such as myself, see room for revision and improvement but few want to actually abolish it.

However, reading the article and knowing what I know, it would seem to me that the U.S. should not be repeating the EU mistakes, not the other way around. The database directive, the ease of takedown under the EUCD and the crossover between design/patent and copyright.

Sure, we have our screw ups when it comes to technology and anti-circumvention, but the EU is at least as messed up on some of the core issues.

Perhaps the article should be targeted at learning from each other's screw ups.

I think most deeply involved with copyright, such as myself, see room for revision and improvement but few want to actually abolish it.

However, reading the article and knowing what I know, it would seem to me that the U.S. should not be repeating the EU mistakes, not the other way around. The database directive, the ease of takedown under the EUCD and the crossover between design/patent and copyright.

Sure, we have our screw ups when it comes to technology and anti-circumvention, but the EU is at least as messed up on some of the core issues.

Perhaps the article should be targeted at learning from each other’s screw ups.