Difference between revisions of "Archive talk:2006-2007 Policy Paper"

From FreeCulture.org
Jump to: navigation, search
m (Sections not included: software copyright)
m (moving notes to 2006-2007 Policy Paper/Notes)
Line 1: Line 1:
Notes by the board of directors on the policy paper.
This page may be used to discuss the [[2006-2007 Policy Paper]]. To comment here, you will need to [[Special:Userlogin|create an account or log in]].
== Sections not included ==
Before commenting, please read the [[2006-2007 Policy Paper/Notes|/Notes]]. --[[User:Gavinbaker|Gavin]] 18:56, 28 January 2006 (EST)
=== Outside the Scope ===
* Non-legislative policy
* State or local policy
* Other countries
=== Public spectrum ===
* DTV transition, esp. re: unlicensed spectrum
* use of public spectrum (fairness doctrine, ownership regulation)
=== EULAs and contract law ===
* enforcability (coercion)
* market regulation ("bill of rights")
=== Municipal wi-fi ===
=== Government copyright ===
'''What we want''': The federal government should not hold copyrights. 
'''Why''': Under copyright law, works of the US government are not covered by copyright.  However, currently works of contractors for the government and works transferred to the government are excluded from that.  We should close those loopholes, for the same reasons that works of the government are not copyrighted.
'''For more information''':
* [http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#105 17 USC § 105] ("Copyright protection ... is not available for any work of the United States Government")
* [http://cendi.gov/publications/04-8copyright.html Frequently Asked Questions About Copyright], CENDI, 2004, especially  sections 3, "U.S. Government Works," and 4, "Works Created Under a Federal Contract or Grant".
=== TRIPs / WTO ===
* [http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/trips_e/trips_e.htm]
=== FTAA / Bilateral FTAs ===
Free trade agreements are frequently used to export the worst parts of US copyright to other countries.  While the FTAA seems to have been stopped for now, the United States is now turning to bilateral FTAs and other smaller arrangements, such as CAFTA.  These trade agreements are not the place for exporting stupid copyright laws.
=== Software copyright ===
* Should software, as a class of copyrighted works, be treated the same as other classes? (e.g. should software copyright last as long as musical copyright)
* How can we improve the disclosure of source code once software enters the public domain?
** The current requirements to register copyright on software do not require the full source code to be deposited:
*** There are strange rules over the amount of source required to deposit, rather than simply a full copy
*** The deposit is permitted to black out portions of the code that constitute "trade secrets"
** The current system does not provide much incentive to register copyright, via both weak positive incentives and high costs
* Should software, in addition to copyright, be allowed to claim trade secrets? (We've already set the policy that software should not be subject to patent.)

Revision as of 23:56, 28 January 2006

This page may be used to discuss the 2006-2007 Policy Paper. To comment here, you will need to create an account or log in.

Before commenting, please read the /Notes. --Gavin 18:56, 28 January 2006 (EST)