Finland adopts EUCD --After Dawn

5 October 2005 9:25 by dRD

Finnish Parliament approved today a controversial new copyright legislation, based on European Union's Copyright Directive (EUCD). The legislation sparked enormous opposition from worried citizens, but despite the public critique even in mainstream media, the parties currently in coalition government decided to approve the legislation without further modifications.

Legislation has several confusing details and extremely badly worded chapters, making it one of the most draconian versions of EUCD in Europe. Once Finland's president (who has right to veto the law, but the right is used extremely rarely) approves the legislation, it will come into effect, typically within few months.

As Finland has traditionally enjoyed quite relaxed copyright legislation, the change is dramatic. Previously, copying for own personal use (whether you owned the CD/DVD/book/whatever) was perfectly legal and the authors were compensated by blank media levy. Now, the blank media levy will remain in place, but at least the following things will change:

Circumventing copy protections, even for personal use, will be illegal. (it states so in the law, even tho the government tried to argue that the right wont be pursued by government, but nothing stops record labels, movie studios, etc to do so)
Distributing (even for free) tools (whether physical devices or software) that allow circumventing copy protection mechanisms will be illegal. (this includes DVD rippers, tools that allow copying copy-protected CDs, etc)
Advertising tools that allow circumventing copy protection mechanisms will be illegal. (and the law doesn't state how advertising is determined. So, basically simply linking to a page that has DVD ripper downloads from your own site can be considered "advertising")
Possession of tools that allow circumventing copy protection mechanisms will be illegal. Even for personal use.
Guides on how to circumvent copy protection mechanisms can be considered as "tools" and thus are also illegal.
Worryingly, even "organized discussion" on how to circumvent copy protection mechanisms, will be illegal. (and no, Finland doesn't have similar to American Supreme Court that determines whether laws are against constitution, but when laws are approved, they by default are in harmony with constitution and can't be later overturned on basis that they are un-constitutional)

Ironically, Finnish education minister, Ms. Tanja Karpela, argued that "only 1 percent of current music CDs include copy protection mechanisms", thus making the legislation invisible to users. However, she forgot to mention that virtually 100 percent of DVDs do have copy protection and therefor the former right to backup and copy DVDs will disappear. Also, by using at least some level of logic, one can assume that once breaking copy-protection mechanisms will be illegal, most new CDs will feature such mechanism.

So, basically -- buy a portable MP3 player and a copy-protected CD. And you can't copy the music from the CD to your MP3 player legally any more, as you'd break law if you circumvent the copy protection mechanism found on CD.

And the whole legislation is quite close to us -- AfterDawn.com is a Finnish company. So, compare the legislation and what you can find from our site and you probably see certain problem there..

Speaking of Europe, here's this from the Register:
---------------

Consumer body bemoans harsher Euro IP laws

Copyrights and responsibilities
By Tony Smith
Published Wednesday 5th October 2005 12:06 GMT

UK quango the National Consumer Council (NCC) has called on European Commission legislators to take a fairer stance on consumer intellectual property rights.

The NCC believes it's disproportionate to invoke ever-tougher penalties for individuals found guilty of infringing intellectual property laws. The key word is 'individuals', because the NCC sees a clear difference between consumers copying content and "organised criminal gangs" doing the same.

There is a difference - the latter are motivated solely by financial gain while consumers generally aren't. At the same time, because technology has made it so easy for consumer to duplicate content, the effect on copyright holders is increasingly the same whoever does the copying.

"The European Commission must think again before bringing in new and tougher intellectual property laws," said the NCC's policy director Jill Johnstone. "Criminal sanctions for infringing copyright holders' rights must be applied only to organised crime - not to individual citizens making use of new technologies."

"Moves are afoot in Brussels to tighten up enforcement of intellectual property laws," she added. "It could mean consumers facing criminal sanctions and a criminal record for sharing creative content."

Alas, just as the EC is failing to differentiate between pirates and those who copy for convenience - which we think are the people the NCC has in mind: those folk who copy CDs so they can also play songs in the car, say - the NCC similarly fails to appreciate there's a difference between a consumer who engages in what might be termed a 'fair use' and another who posts thousands upon thousands of new songs for anyone and everyone to plunder.

"Any new laws must be very clear on this point and must strike a balance between right holders’ interests in getting a fair return and the public and consumer interests of fair access and use, and the encouragement of innovation," added Johnstone.

Her language puts her dangerously close to the techno-utopian camp, but still Johnstone and the NCC are correct on at least one point: future EC legislation does need to define closely what is reasonable copying - ripping a CD so you can play it on your iPod, an act currently illegal in the UK though not in some other European countries - and making it possible for anyone to steal music. In short, there needs to be a clear distinction made between the private and public domains. ®

And, another:
------------------

FIPR warns of danger of criminalising IP breaches --The Register

By Lucy Sherriff
Published Wednesday 5th October 2005 16:02 GMT

The British government is trying to use its presidency of the EU to push through a European directive would give police more powers to act against copyright infringers than they currently have to deal with suspected terrorists, according to the Foundation for Information Policy Research (FIPR).

The FIPR also warns that the directive, a follow up to the Intellectual Property Rights Enforcement directive, would force the UK to criminalise patent infringement, and incitement to infringe copyrights or patents.

If patent infringement becomes a crime, the FIPR argues, the risks involved in launching a technology start-up will be even greater than they are today. It warns that promising businesses will choose to set up in the US instead, where patent infringement will remain a civil matter.

Ross Anderson, chair of FIPR and professor of security engineering at Cambridge University said that despite government promises to "foster the creative industries", this directive will have exactly the opposite effect.

"It will interfere with enterprise and choke off competition. It will push up prices for consumers at a time of rising global inflation, and do particular harm to the software and communications industries," he says. "It will also harm universities, libraries and the disabled."

You can read the full text of the proposed directive here (pdf). ®

some comments on slashdot by finnish citizens speak volumes about the injustice the legislature perpetrated on them.

here andhere

some select quotes:
"Only a handful of the members of parliament came out to listen to us or answer our questions, most of them already aware of our case and supporting it. I saw many people peeking out from the windows, looking scarily at us and then leaving, without coming out. One speaker told us something like "we'll have your mp3s sorted out later". What an idiot! Seems like no-one cared to even read the parts of the new law that we stated were problematic. "

"....when the bill was discussed for the very last time, a representative of a musicians' organisation was put on the wires stating the demonstrators' cry for free speech was tarnishing the concept for free speech because the demonstrators just want to download songs in its name. This while behind him people were touting DeCSS signs and spreading out short DeCSS programmes on flyers with the text "distributing this flyer will become illegal"."

The more i think of this, and the more i think of how efforts by huge nonprofits and even huge corps like intel to change the DMCA are comming to nothing, the more i think only total rebellion or assassinations will "convince" these ignorant and corrupt bastards.

A bit extreme don't you think awehr? What about a little less violent alternative? If the laws are in place and vague, why not nail them with thier own laws? Tag them for every breach you can find on thier websites, handsards, any recording of any type. Make it such a pain in the ass that they have to review it.

But, good lord I hope we can avoid this on this side of the pond.

What do these huge corp types thrive on?
MONEY. How do you get them to stop acting this way? Stop giving them your money.

Alex, shame on you....just...shame on you. Go to your room.