Date: Sat, 27 Dec 1997 17:26:50 -0600 (CST)
Subject: M-NEWS: E;Clinton Signs New Restrictive Cyberspace Copyright Law, Dec 27 (fwd)






---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Sat, 27 Dec 1997 12:39:44 -0600 (CST)
From: Chiapas95 <owner-chiapas95-AT-eco.utexas.edu>
Reply-To: Chiapas 95 Moderators <chiapas-AT-eco.utexas.edu>
Subject: E;Clinton Signs New Restrictive Cyberspace Copyright Law, Dec 27

This posting has been forwarded to you as a service of 
Accion Zapatista de Austin.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Sat, 27 Dec 1997 11:15:16 -0600 (CST)
From: "Harry M. Cleaver" <hmcleave-AT-eco.utexas.edu>
Reply-To: accion-zapatista-AT-mcfeeley.cc.utexas.edu
Subject: Clinton Signs New Restrictive Cyberspace Copyright Law (fwd)


---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Fri, 26 Dec 1997 15:26:35 -0800 (PST)
From: Michael Eisenscher <meisenscher-AT-igc.apc.org>
Reply-To: pen-l-AT-galaxy.csuchico.edu
Subject: Clinton Signs New Restrictive Cyberspace Copyright Law

To all those who have received articles from me, who periodically repost new
articles themselves, or who run newsgroups:

This article recently came to my attention.  It seems that the "Fair Use"
Doctrine, which I contend covered much of the material I have been posting
(which others may dispute), may have been nullified by a new law recently
signed by Clinton.  While the article indicates that the primary target of
the law is software piracy, it is by no means limited to that.  If this new
law is interpreted restrictively, any reproduction of an article from a
website (NYT, WSJ, etc.) via the Internet, whether to individuals or to a
newgroup listserve, would constitute a violation.  The Fair Use exclusion
that allows partial excerpts for scholarly citation, review or commentary
would likely still apply, but reproduction of an entire article would be
precluded under most circumstances.  There is no restriction on posting URL
(web addresses) that allow others to go to the source to see the article in
its entirety; however, that assumes the site is not restricted to paid
subscribers (e.g., WSJ Interactive Edition).  It also will mean that each
person will have to take the time to chase down their own copies.  (This
generally takes me from 30-60 minutes per day to locate, reformat, combine,
and distribute.)

For those who have asked to be included on my distribution list, and
newsgroups to which I have posted selected articles, this new set of
restrictions constitutes a considerable restraint.  As this Act is only very
recently signed into law, it remains to be seen who will be prosecuted, for
what kinds of alleged violations, and what happens when test cases go to the
courts.    Stay tuned.  [Technically, I am very probably violating the law
by posting this report in its entirety.  It was passed on to me without a URL.]

In solidarity,
Michael E. (The Pirate of Agitprop)

============================================
Published Thursday, December 18, 1997, in the San Jose Mercury News

Penalties can apply to non-profit postings
Clinton signs tough digital copyright law

WASHINGTON -- President Clinton has signed the first law directly
cracking down on unauthorized distribution of copyrighted material such
as books, software and music in cyberspace.

The No Electronic Theft Act makes it a crime to possess or distribute
multiple copies of online copyrighted material, for profit or
otherwise. Penalties include fines of up to $250,000 and five years in
prison.

The law closes a loophole in criminal law that had allowed the
distribution of copyrighted material as long as the offender didn't
seek profit.

Under the law, a person who ``willfully'' infringes on copyrighted
material worth at least $1,000 could be subject to criminal prosecution
even if he does not profit.

Software and entertainment groups, including the Business Software
Alliance, the Motion Picture Association and the Association of
American Publishers, said the change was essential to protect software,
music recordings and other creative products easily pirated over the
Internet.

They cited a 1994 court case dismissing criminal copyright charges
against a Massachusetts Institute of Technology student who posted
copies of popular software programs on the Internet for free
downloading.

But last month, a leading group of scientists, the Association for
Computing, wrote to Clinton asking him to veto the bill because it
might inadvertently criminalize many scientific publications available
over the Internet, and might limit the ``fair use'' doctrine.

Other digital copyright issues, including international intellectual
property protection, await Congress in 1998. And some who had opposed
this law because of its potential to impede research remain wary: ``We
will see how the legislation is implemented,'' says Lauren Gelman of
the U.S. Association for Computing.

Targets of this law are not Web site creators or teens sharing
software, says Shari Steele of the Electronic Frontier Foundation.
``This is not intended to put people in jail for making one or two
copies. It's for people committing commercial-scale software piracy.''

1997 Mercury Center. The information you receive online from Mercury
Center is protected by the copyright laws of the United States. The
copyright laws prohibit any copying, redistributing, retransmitting, or
repurposing of any copyright-protected material.




--
To unsubscribe from this list send a message containing the words
unsubscribe chiapas95 to majordomo-AT-eco.utexas.edu.  Previous messages are
available from http://www.eco.utexas.edu or gopher://eco.utexas.edu.