<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.6000.16705" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY text=#000000 bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" color=#0000ff size=2>Some comments:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" color=#0000ff size=2>- I am afraid this war is
over, there is little to do against it.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" color=#0000ff size=2>- Yes, this "droit de
suite" regulation is strange, and controversial, and it always has
been.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" color=#0000ff size=2>- Having said that, please
note that the scope is relatively limited (of the Spanish transposition is not,
the ECJ may correct it).</FONT> <FONT face="Comic Sans MS" color=#0000ff
size=2>It is only for works of art like paintings that are sold via professional
art galeries and auctions, and there is a threshold.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" color=#0000ff size=2>- The purpose is to prevent
the "Vincent van Gogh" syndrome: a poor painter selling his works for next to
nothing because heen needs the money quickly, finding that only a few years
later his works are traded for zillions of euro's. Isn't that a noble,
social purpose?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" color=#0000ff size=2>- This situation leads to
the more general question: what is *justice* if someone created something,
and got very little money for it - that later turned out to be VERY valuable. It
is a kind of market failure that can not be remedied by "internalisation".
Sometimes copyright and patent law can help, but not always: copyright does not
prevent the sale of a physical painting. In basic science, the problem is
probably even worse: there are often decades if not centuries between
scientific discoveries and actual application. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Comic Sans MS"><FONT size=2><FONT color=#0000ff>Einsteins
theories of relativity are essential for GPS receivers - but his heirs will not
get a single penny from the next boom in mobile telephones, integrated GPS
receivers (and existing navagation systems for cars like Garmin and Tomtom). And
99% of engineering mechanics still draws on the concepts of Isaac Newton -
shouldn't his family be VERY rich? Well, this example obviously shows that there
are limits. But aren't there limits on the other side as well? The MP3
"inventors" become richer and richer from every MP3 device that is
sold. Another example: recently an (emeritus) professor of expermental
cardiology told me that his patents raised enough money to cater for
his salary AND the salaries of his entire department for all his
career.</FONT></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" color=#0000ff size=2>Im sum, 3 categories of
goods can be distinguished:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" color=#0000ff size=2>1. goods that naturally
relate to a "token": a carpenter who makes a table gets paid for the table, and
gives the table to the buyer</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" color=#0000ff size=2>2. for information goods,
sometimes something similar can be mimiced using so-called "intelectual property
law".</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" color=#0000ff size=2>3. but often that does not
work either.</FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" color=#0000ff size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" color=#0000ff size=2>In economic terminology,
the production of public goods SOMETIMES can be financed by internalisation,
perhaps supported by law. In that case, effectvely the public goods are no
longer public goods. BUT there are limits. If the cost of enforcement is higher
than the yield, the scheme does not work. Incidentally, that explains the
present popularity of criminal law. Then the enforcement cost is norne by
the taxpayer. But effectively that subsidises a (supposedly) commercial activity
that can not stand on his own feet.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" color=#0000ff size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" color=#0000ff size=2>In sum, here we re-nvent
the principle of information freedom. Quod erat
demonstrandum. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" color=#0000ff size=2> </FONT></DIV>
<DIV>Groeten, Grüße, Regards, Cordialement, Hälsningar, Ciao, Saygilar,
Üdvözlettel, Pozdrowienia, Kumusta, Adios, Oan't sjen, Ave, Doei, Yassou,
Yoroshiku, Slán, Vinarliga, Kær Kveðja<BR>>>> REINIER B. BAKELS PhD
LL.M. MSc<BR>private: Johan Willem Frisostraat 149, 2713 CC Zoetermeer, The
Netherlands telephone: +31 79 316 3126, GSM ("Handy") +31 6 4988 6490, fax
+31 79 316 7221</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=aiarakoa@yahoo.es href="mailto:aiarakoa@yahoo.es">Carlos Ayala
Vargas</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A
title=pp.international.general@lists.pirateweb.net
href="mailto:pp.international.general@lists.pirateweb.net">Pirate Parties
International -- General Talk</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Thursday, December 25, 2008 1:38
PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> [pp.int.general] Resale rights
and 2001/84/EC directive: obscenely enlarging material interests of
authors</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>Congratulations, you've bought a brand-new house, in a nice
place, nice design and inner distribution, and it cost 200.000 € ... however,
3 years later you have to resell it because you move 500 km far from it; in
spite of the current real estate crisis, you become able to sale it for
250.000 €; would you find it reasonable that the architect ask you for a 1 %
of the sale price -i.e., 2.500 €-?<BR><BR>If the answer is no, then try to
read <A
href="http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:32001L0084:EN:HTML">Directive
2001/84/EC</A>, and get scared. That Directive is hot news in Spain, as last
Tuesday it become announced in the Official State Bulletin the <A
href="http://www.boe.es/boe/dias/2008/12/25/pdfs/A51995-51997.pdf">Law 3/2008
(in Spanish)</A> -which implements the EU Directive-; it doesn't abolish the
<A href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-sale_doctrine">first-sale
doctrine</A>, though damages it considerably -it doesn't even consider the
difference between sale and resale prices; i.e, if you bought a painting for
50.000 € and you sell it for 40.000 €, you not only lose 10.000 € in the
transaction, but also have to pay a 2.000 € fee (i.e., to have a 2.000 €
additional loss)!-.<BR><BR>2001/84/EC is to be applied to the resale of
"<I>works of graphic or plastic art such as pictures, collages, paintings,
drawings, engravings, prints, lithographs, sculptures, tapestries, ceramics,
glassware and photographs, provided they are made by the artist himself or are
copies considered to be original works of art</I>". While some may argue that
houses are not the same as intellectual works, we must point out that
2001/84/EC explicitly states in Preamble, 2nd paragraph, that "<I>the
subject-matter of the resale right is <B>the physical work</B>, namely <B>the
medium in which the protected work is incorporated</B></I>" -by analogy, if
the same were applied to houses, the royalty wouldn't be applied to the
architect design, but to the medium in which the <I>protected work</I> would
be incorporated (the house)-.<BR><BR>As you may see, retrogressive measures
are never or rarely applied to author's material rights; they only become
larger, and larger, and larger ...
regards,<BR><BR><BR>
Carlos
Ayala<BR>
( Aiarakoa
)<BR><BR>
Partido Pirata National Board's Chairman<BR>
<P>
<HR>
<P></P>____________________________________________________<BR>Pirate Parties
International - General
Talk<BR>pp.international.general@lists.pirateweb.net<BR>http://lists.pirateweb.net/mailman/listinfo/pp.international.general<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>