Really well-written post here by Nathaniel Tapley, expressing his disappointment at the Writer's Guild backing of the eye-rollingly poor Digital Economy Act.
Quote here:
"It is a crying shame that, in order to appear to robustly support the rights of creators, the WGGB feels the need to support measures which assume guilt rather than innocence, and are fundamentally flawed and unjust in the ways in which they are to be applied.
It is more of a shame that Mr Corbett (President of the WG) either does not understand, or pretends not to notice the difference between what the Bill does, and what he says it does: “introducing automatic penalties against people who use the internet to download music, films, books or whatever in breach of copyrights held by creators, publishers, producers, etc.”
Mr Corbett responds here.
5 comments:
And there I was feeling guilty as a writer (and WGGB member) for thinking the D.E. Bill was one of the biggest piles of poo to come out of the govt in a long time (at least a month).
Glad I'm not alone.
What horsecrap. More pertinent to your last post, but I missed that one: I fail to see that the rushing through of the bill is anything less than an admission that it wouldn't stand up to further scrutiny.
A fantastic article, using ice-cream as an anology to demonstrate the absurdity of the DEB
http://confusedofcalcutta.com/2010/04/02/the-digital-economy-bill-thinking-about-banana-ice-cream/
I've read the post, and the reply.
Are they talking at cross purposes?
Damn it all. I am NOT going to go and read an entire government bl**dy bill to try to understand what the f*ck they are on about.
Government. Screw up. We're f*cked, again.
Does that sum it up?
By "they" I mean Bernie.
(sorry, but you don't seem to be paying attention to the underlying issues - ie: it's the internet! ... Which is why your reply has completely confused me.)
Post a Comment