Fulcrum29

Honorary Master
Joined
Jun 25, 2010
Messages
45,051
Aren’t they the ones who are pro reverse engineering, would this not count the US Digital Copyright Management Act (DCMA) and EU (database Directive)?

I might be out perspective here, but it seems okay to them to trespass intellectual property but not enter a treaty.
 

Jan

Who's the Boss?
Staff member
Joined
May 24, 2010
Messages
6,308
Aren’t they the ones who are pro reverse engineering, would this not count the US Digital Copyright Management Act (DCMA) and EU (database Directive)?

I might be out perspective here, but it seems okay to them to trespass intellectual property but not enter a treaty.

Not as I understand it. I'm putting together a follow-up article that will hopefully tie everything together nicely. These policy recommendations seem to me to come from a place of good intentions. It will be interesting to see how it all turns out, though.
 

Fulcrum29

Honorary Master
Joined
Jun 25, 2010
Messages
45,051
Not as I understand it. I'm putting together a follow-up article that will hopefully tie everything together nicely. These policy recommendations seem to me to come from a place of good intentions. It will be interesting to see how it all turns out, though.

A follow-up article might put things more in perspective for me, reason I am challenging this is due to the previous article:

http://mybroadband.co.za/news/software/86477-reverse-engineering-software-should-be-allowed-dti.html

According to the DTI, South Africa must adopt “pro-competitive measures under copyright legislation”. This legislation must provide the adoption and maintenance of broad exemptions for educational, research, and library uses.

The full text of the recommendation is reproduced below for the sake of accuracy:

South Africa should allow software to be adapted to local needs through copyright legislation that allows reverse engineering of computer software programs consistent with its international treaty obligations.

Then taking this article:

South Africa should not join international copyright treaties that may compromise the government’s stance on social and economic developmental goals.

With empathise on social and economic developmental goals.

The DTI said that these are bad models for copyright legislation in a developing country such as South Africa because they are restrictive instruments.

“The DCMA and EU Directive restrict the number of downloads, whether for commercial or personal/research use,” the DTI said.

It is just giving me the wrong idea about what they actually do want to achieve and how they want to proceed on doing so. I am very pro putting entities within technological agreements and working together on a greater goal, with different markets in mind, especially with the focus on social and economic development. Developed or developing market have much to learn from each other, none is the same, and improving the one may benefit the other within relationship. Whether this will happen on a larger scale… Not anytime soon.

As I understand the whole purpose behind DTI is to enhance access to copyrighted material and achieve development goals for education and knowledge transfer. I don’t think dismissing international intellectual property treaties will solve these issues… more taking steps back in my opinion than anything else, especially taking in regard their defined broad exemptions with social and economic developmental goals.
 

Jan

Who's the Boss?
Staff member
Joined
May 24, 2010
Messages
6,308
It is just giving me the wrong idea about what they actually do want to achieve and how they want to proceed on doing so.

All the things you linked are related, though I think the DTI's document isn't particularly well-worded. At least not for us lay-readers.

Cory Doctorow spoke about these things at iWeek yesterday and tied it all together quite nicely (how reverse engineering relates to copyright treaties, and why reverse engineering might be useful in some cases), I thought, so look out for something like that next week.
 

Bern

Expert Member
Joined
Apr 29, 2010
Messages
2,675
The Film and Publications Board is not going to be happy, more freedom and easier access to content is going to make them even more irrelevant!

I think they make a great point, it is not that they are completely against copyright, but they recognise the current treaties are based on old, ridiculous protocols. I actually am incredibly surprised they are willing to take this stance!
 

Tharaxis

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 9, 2003
Messages
553
I stand to be corrected, but it's the DMCA (Digital Millennium Copyright Act), not DCMA (Digital Copyright Management Act). If this is coming from the people responsible for drafting the legislations I'm worried.
 

noxibox

Honorary Master
Joined
Apr 6, 2005
Messages
21,263
If they support reverse engineering then I'm glad to hear it. They all sound like good aims. Ultimately the so-called intellectual property of developed countries should be of no concern to developing countries. The laws in those developed countries are desperately in need of radical reform to strip and pare the protections, as well as what can be protected, anyway.
 
Top