A Few Global Cultural Treasures We Will Lose for 20 Years Under the TPP
eff.org
eff.org
The US doesn't even make a show of it anymore. Mickey Mouse must be protected at all costs in perpetuity, all the benefits of expiring copyrights to the population at large be damned.
http://tfr.faa.gov/save_pages/detail_4_3634.html
TFRs (temporary flight restrictions) are intended for short-term events like air shows and missile launches, but Disney's TFR has been in effect since 2003.
http://japanitlaw.blogspot.com/2013/01/tpps-effect-on-fanzin...
" In this ecosystem, the requirement of a complaint in the copyright law works as a mechanism to respect the intention of the rights holder on whether or not they want to intervene. Although the complaint requirement is only the prerequisite for prosecution, in practice, it is rare for the police to commence an investigation without a complaint by the rights holder.
However, this situation may change. The draft of the request of the US on Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) 15.5(g) stipulates, "its authorities may initiate legal action ex officio with respect to the offenses described in this Chapter, without the need for a formal complaint by a private party or rights holder."
If we had nothing to go on other than the volume of these bribes to say who had power and who didn't, I'd say...turns out, the media is pretty powerful. A news anchor is probably more powerful than 100 judges. And so, in some way or another, the American Government has to figure out a way to keep news outlets as happy as they demand to be, or suffer the dire consequences. While corruption in America exists, it isn't like the government could simply give them billions of dollars (could be wrong here), so they try to please them by enriching the conglomerates that own the channels in other ways. Primarily, nowadays, that means perpetuating copyright monopolies, under more draconian laws, in overseas countries that can be made or enticed to play ball.
That probably isn't the right takeaway from these numbers. The owner of a news network almost certainly makes a lot more money than a judge. The declining marginal utility of a dollar at high income levels implies that it will take a lot more to bribe a rich business owner than a middle class government employee, regardless of the actual value of services rendered.
You're also ignoring the issue of scale. The court system has thousands of judges but there are only a handful of major news networks. It looks to end up costing about the same amount to bribe all the news networks vs. all the judges.
Moreover, you're assuming that the entertainment business can dictate what the news business reports strongly enough to make the politicians care. But if that's the case then why aren't all the major news networks owned by oil companies and banks?
The reason copyright keeps getting extended is that there has been no organized well-financed opposition to it. Nobody with money is lobbying against it. It's not like it even benefits the industry very much! How much money is Disney really making on 100 year old movies? But the cost of extending copyright is paid by the general public who aren't organized enough to get their way, much as it is with all the other big industries that get their way at the expense of the population at large.
In the United States at least the entertainment businesses can dictate what the broadcast television news business reports. ABC is owned by Disney. NBC is owned by Universal. CBS is owned by Viacom.
On the other hand, I almost missed the button at the bottom of the article. I assume they've run some tests but the font on the button just reads "ignore me" to my eyes.
Oh yes, those poor European film lovers, with their local industries that produce so many films that nobody could hope to watch them all. I bet everyone in Europe deeply laments not being able to make derivative works of 50-year old European movies, and envies their counterparts in Malaysia and Brunei.