Hello,
(Translated the "Belgische Auteurswet"="Belgian author law", but I think in english this is the copyright law, excuse me for my possible incorrect translation)
I'm following computer science at the RUG in Belgium, and we have a college about "Industrial rights". We saw the Belgian Copyright Law, protection of databases, the Belgian Software law, etc.
As being a smartass I asked our professor about the EUCD in our last lesson, and about the effects on software makers. I also pointed the several people in in the FSF and OSS world didn't like the EUCD.
Like I could have thought the guy didn't know about FSF/OSS, but he did tell me that the improvments that are going to be made to the Belgian copyright law are good (Yikes!) and I should "cry with the wolves in the forrest".
Well, I took the proposel in my hand of new Belgian copyright law, and I did see it only changed the law about copyright and databases, but not the Software law!
The Belgian Software law also states the concerning software one has to follow the software law and when this doesn't handle the specific case you have to look at the copyright law.
Why are they changing only the copyright law?
As a second question could somebody give me several examples why the EUCD is bad for FSF/OSS developers? I'm having an oral exam of that course :).
Thanks in advance,
On Fri, 10 May 2002, Rudy Gevaert wrote:
Hello,
(Translated the "Belgische Auteurswet"="Belgian author law", but I think in english this is the copyright law, excuse me for my possible incorrect translation)
I'm following computer science at the RUG in Belgium, and we have a college about "Industrial rights". We saw the Belgian Copyright Law, protection of databases, the Belgian Software law, etc.
As being a smartass I asked our professor about the EUCD in our last lesson, and about the effects on software makers. I also pointed the several people in in the FSF and OSS world didn't like the EUCD.
Like I could have thought the guy didn't know about FSF/OSS, but he did tell me that the improvments that are going to be made to the Belgian copyright law are good (Yikes!) and I should "cry with the wolves in the forrest".
What are the arguments ? The proposal-law include multiple modification (historical issue, compatibility to other law and,of cours,e the EUCD part (mainly Article 13))
As a teacher, the best way is to argue about that ;-)
Well, I took the proposel in my hand of new Belgian copyright law, and I did see it only changed the law about copyright and databases, but not the Software law!
The Directive (2001/29/CE) is regarding the author right law in respective contries in europe.
The belgian pre-proposal law is regarding "Droit d'auteur et droit voisin". The software is protected by the Berne convention because it's a way of expression (like books or any other of expressions).
What do you mean by the software law (there is multiple law, ordonnance for each part of country) ?
So the proposal is modification of the author right law. It's covering software but any other way of expression (like music, books and so on..)
The Belgian Software law also states the concerning software one has to follow the software law and when this doesn't handle the specific case you have to look at the copyright law.
Why are they changing only the copyright law?
Because copyright (the anglo-saxon terms of "droit d'auteur") is a protection (for defined period : life of the author + 50(variable) years) way of expression for the author. (cf. Convention de Berne)
The copyright law in Belgium is an application of the Berne convention.
The EUCD came from the modification of the article 11 of WIPO (OMPI) about the addition of security extension.
As a second question could somebody give me several examples why the EUCD is bad for FSF/OSS developers? I'm having an oral exam of that course :).
I invite you to read the two letters that we have sent to the Prime Minister and Minister of Justice.
http://www.ael.be/action/2002/eucd/lettre-eucd.html (before the law proposal)
After the pre-proposal law :
http://www.ael.be/action/2002/eucd/projet-de-loi-belge/
Maybe we could have a discussion with your teacher. ;-)
I hope this helps.
Don't hesitate to contact us.
activists@ael.be
adulau
Thanks in advance,
On Sat, May 11, 2002 at 09:23:16AM +0200, Alexandre Dulaunoy wrote:
Like I could have thought the guy didn't know about FSF/OSS, but he did tell me that the improvments that are going to be made to the Belgian copyright law are good (Yikes!) and I should "cry with the wolves in the forrest".
should be: "and I should NOT "cry...". The guy maked fun out of me :( in front of my whole class :)
What are the arguments ? The proposal-law include multiple modification (historical issue, compatibility to other law and,of cours,e the EUCD part (mainly Article 13))
As a teacher, the best way is to argue about that ;-)
Well he didn't have any arguments, only did he say it was good for us...
Well, I took the proposel in my hand of new Belgian copyright law, and I did see it only changed the law about copyright and databases, but not the Software law!
The Directive (2001/29/CE) is regarding the author right law in respective contries in europe.
The belgian pre-proposal law is regarding "Droit d'auteur et droit voisin". The software is protected by the Berne convention because it's a way of expression (like books or any other of expressions).
Yes indeed, as I see now my translation was not correct.
What do you mean by the software law (there is multiple law, ordonnance for each part of country) ?
Well I mean the law of 30 june 94 concering the transpositon if Belgian law from the european guideline of 14 May 91, about the protection by law of computerprograms. (Trying to translate from dutch to english)
(BS. 27 juli 1994, 19315)
So the proposal is modification of the author right law. It's covering software but any other way of expression (like music, books and so on..)
So the law I stated above will be useless? Now one has to look first at the law I stated and when it doesn't apply you have to look at the author right law.
The Belgian Software law also states the concerning software one has to follow the software law and when this doesn't handle the specific case you have to look at the copyright law.
Why are they changing only the copyright law?
Because copyright (the anglo-saxon terms of "droit d'auteur") is a protection (for defined period : life of the author + 50(variable) years) way of expression for the author. (cf. Convention de Berne)
The copyright law in Belgium is an application of the Berne convention.
The EUCD came from the modification of the article 11 of WIPO (OMPI) about the addition of security extension.
As a second question could somebody give me several examples why the EUCD is bad for FSF/OSS developers? I'm having an oral exam of that course :).
I invite you to read the two letters that we have sent to the Prime Minister and Minister of Justice.
http://www.ael.be/action/2002/eucd/lettre-eucd.html (before the law proposal)
After the pre-proposal law :
I'll certainly take a look at it! But my french isn't that good, so I will have to do it one passe at a time :)
Maybe we could have a discussion with your teacher. ;-)
A debat at the uni of Ghent would be better :) (I could prolly fix that...)
Thank you for your answer :)
Rudy Gevaert wrote:
On Sat, May 11, 2002 at 09:23:16AM +0200, Alexandre Dulaunoy wrote:
What do you mean by the software law (there is multiple law, ordonnance for each part of country) ?
Well I mean the law of 30 june 94 concering the transpositon if Belgian law from the european guideline of 14 May 91, about the protection by law of computerprograms. (Trying to translate from dutch to english)
That's simply the law that implemented the "software should be protected by copyright" directive 391L0250 from 1991: http://europa.eu.int/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexapi!prod!CELEXnumdoc...
So the law I stated above will be useless? Now one has to look first at the law I stated and when it doesn't apply you have to look at the author right law.
European countries usually adopt an EC Directive by writing up a law that makes the changes to their own laws. For example, here in the Netherlands the "implementation law" said something like "we're going to add computer programs and source code to the list of article 10, copyrightable subject matter".
Do you think there is a conflict between the 1991 Directive and the current EUCD?
Regards,
Arnoud
On Sat, May 11, 2002 at 04:09:05PM +0200, Arnoud Galactus Engelfriet wrote:
Do you think there is a conflict between the 1991 Directive and the current EUCD?
Euh... I would not know ass I am not a laywer... just a student :).
On Sat, May 11, 2002 at 04:09:05PM +0200, Arnoud Galactus Engelfriet wrote: > Do you think there is a conflict between the 1991 Directive > and the current EUCD?
Well, the 91/250/EEC directive gives users the right to reverse-engineer a computer program for interoperability (article 5 and 6). This should make it legal to reverse-engineer _every_ kind of software --- for example, a piece of code that "protects" a copyrighted work, just like an e-book.
The EUCD was written to make the latter kind of activity illegal --- and, of course, it contains a bit of trickery to forbid the reverse-engineering of "effective technological measures," without formally conflicting with the 91/250/EEC directive. More in detail:
* at the beginning (paragraph 50) it is said that the 91/250/EEC directive still applies to computer programs: you can circumvent a "technological measure" if it protects a program that you want to reverse-engineer;
* but what happens when a "technological measure" is not applied to programs, but to other copyrighted works? Paragraphs 6.1 and 6.2 say that it is illegal to circumvent it and/or help other people to do the same;
* finally, paragraph 6.3 defines these "technological measures" in a way that is not strictly related to software. It makes the 91/250/EEC directive irrelevant, and you are forbidden to reverse-engineer a "technological measure" when it is used to protect, for example, a DVD, or an e-book.
Regards,
Alceste