UN Broadcasting Treaty May Restrict Speech

ashshy writes "A UN treaty under proposal could lead to unprecedented restrictions on free speech and fair use rights around the world. Ars Technica pulls together what you need to know from multiple sources." From the article: "The proposed broadcasting treaty would create entirely new global rights for broadcasting companies who have neither created nor own the programming. What's even more alarming is the proposal from the United States that the treaty regulate the Internet transmission of audio and video entertainment. It is dangerous and inappropriate for an unelected international treaty body to undertake the task of creating entirely new rights, which currently exist in no national law, such as webcasting rights and anti-circumvention laws related to broadcasting."

Re:Stop blaming the UN!

[Anonymous Coward]

Of course it's a USA backed agenda, who the fuck else allows their government to be run by entertainment corporations?

Re:For the love of all that is holy...

[UbuntuDupe]

will France please, please, PLEASE for once grow some balls and stand up us?

Good point. If they don't, we might set up them the bomb. They would then be on the way to destruction, at which point they would have no chance to survive make their time.

The old joke: Whats good about America?

[OzPeter]

Its where you keep Americans! .. Ba-da-boom

Yes .. its a joke .. its meant to be funny (well at least to the majority of the world (6 billion or so minus 300 million). Besides, I'm living here now, so I am poking fun against myself - nyah nyah nyah. Thats sad really .. can I go home now??

Re:Um, exactly.

[Eccles]

Remember how the DMCA, SonnyBono-copyright-extension act, etc started in USA: as something Congress felt they were required to do, in order to have US law match treaties such as WIPO.

Actually, the DMCA started when the US pushed for the WIPO copyright treaty, then pushed for the DMCA on the grounds that US law had to match WIPO. A handy scheme to get around local objections.

Time to build Dogbertland, I think.

American?

[C10H14N2]

Well if by "American" you mean "the AmericaS," well, maybe, but last I checked, Nantes was not in the Americas.

From the agenda for this week's meetings:

http://www.wipo.int/meetings/en/html.jsp?url=http: //www.wipo.int/edocs/mdocs/sccr/en/sccr_14/sccr_14 _1_rev.doc [wipo.int]

Protection of broadcasting organizations

- Including introductory presentations of Professor Delia Lipszyc, Buenos Aires University and Chair, InterAmerican Copyright Institute (IIDA), Buenos Aires, Argentina and Professor André Lucas, Nantes University, Nantes, France.

And let's see

http://www.wipo.int/meetings/en/details.jsp?meetin g_id=5762 [wipo.int]

"Treaty on the Protection of Broadcasting Organizations and Cablecasting Organizations (submitted by Singapore)"

Nope, not America.

http://www.wipo.int/meetings/en/details.jsp?meetin g_id=5022 [wipo.int]

"Protection of the Rights of Broadcasting Organizations. Comparison of Proposals of WIPO Member States and the European Community and its Member States Received by September 15, 2003"

America? Where are you?

http://www.wipo.int/meetings/en/details.jsp?meetin g_id=4823 [wipo.int]

"Proposal on the Legal Protection of Broadcasting Organizations (Submitted by Kenya)"
"Protection of the Rights of Broadcasting Organizations (Submitted by Egypt)"
"Protection of the Rights of Broadcasting Organizations (Proposal Submitted by Canada)"

Oh hey! FINALLY!!! Canada! That's American!!!

Honestly, folks, dig a little deeper, okay?