[pp.int.general] copyright vs. "droit d'auteur"

[Reinier Bakels]

>> The issue was whether the human rights argument works. Of course, the 
>> *victims* you quote are all happy with any argument supporting their 
>> cause.
> The thing is that *we all are victims* -don't know other countries'
No, the entertainment industry is not a victim (well, perhaps in a different 
sense, because allegedly(!) human rights are not respected sufficiently).

>> But in my opinion legislators are not easily convinced by the human 
>> rights argument to reduce copyright - as said, there are even "human 
>> rights" argument to increase copyright and copyright enforcement.
> Yes, I know your opinion, and you know mine about
>
> - human rights working as an argument to reduce copyright
> - other human rights /arguments/ being actually lies and distortions to be 
> countered and denied
>
> I think we know each others opinions, but maybe it's not enough for you: 
> maybe you won't be reassured until you convince people (including me?) 
> that only your viewpoint is the valid one.

If everbody else agrees with you, it is the end of the Pirate movement. It 
is just not sensible to consider major counter-arguments as a challenge - if 
there are other options.

>> Yes, it is a private copy, and levies are designed to compensate the 
>> author.
> Wrong. If levies were designed to compensate the author, levies would be 
> received by authors of the copied works, what doesn't happen. In Spain,
We all know that the actual systems are far from perfect (to say the least), 
but the purpose clearly is to compensate authors.

>> I admit: privacy is basically a human right of its own kind, and here 
>> human rights relevant. Still, the argument is easily reversed: "we 
>> shouldn't be overly concerned with privacy and risk the lives of people 
>> due to terrorist attacks".
> /Easily/? Not without lying and, if they lie, I think our duty is to 
> counter and deny their lies.
No. It is not far-fetched to argue that increased surveillance improves 
safety. The issue is that the negative side is ignored, or at least no 
proper trade-off is made. It is also personal to some extent. Some people 
value safety more than the loss of privacy, vice versa.

(I skip the other argument for the sake of brevity).
reinier