The United States Government should have an office that is dedicated to promoting innovation both within the government and within the economy as a whole.
A forward-and-delete system should count as a distribution or a transfer of a copy, not a reproduction. If the net number of copies at the end of the transaction is the same as before the transaction, it shouldn’t be considered the making of a copy.
Some of the fastest and most cost-effective networks in America are run by municipal entities. These include Lafayette LA and Chattanooga TN. If communities wish to construct and operate public high speed Internet access networks for their citizens, they should be able to do so. A Federal Law should be passed to preempt the 17 (or so) states with (largely ALEC-inspired) legislative barriers to such practices. Several years ago, a Community Broadband Bill co-sponsored by Senators McCain and Lautenberg (R & D, respectively) died in Congress. Let’s resurrect and pass it.
“The Free Internet Act: To promote prosperity, creativity, entrepreneurship and innovation by preventing the restriction of liberty and preventing the means of censorship. FIA will allow Internet users to browse freely without any means of censorship, users have the right to free speech and to free knowledge; we govern the content of the Internet, governments don’t. However enforcements/laws must also be put into place to protect copyrighted content.” (more…)
If a software EULA says that a user isn’t the “owner” of the copy of the software, that person can’t lawfully make use of first sale. This could be fixed if section 109 applied to whoever possessed the work, not necessarily whoever owned it.
That way, transferring the same lawfully made (and likely authorized) copy wouldn’t be an automatic infringement.
Although this would mean that someone wouldn’t be liable for copyright infringement if they sold a rented DVD, for instance, they’d still be on the hook for literally stealing that DVD from Blockbuster.
Protect not only the Internet but the tens of millions of American citizens who need to know that when they buy Internet access, they’re getting access to the real Internet. Network providers who offer services that depend on violating IP-layer neutrality should be prohibited from labeling those services as “Internet,” as their doing so will only undermine the weight of consensus authority presently accorded to the existing standards. The term “Internet” represents specific standards that provide IP-layer neutral connectivity that supports the openness of access and innovation that have been the defining characteristics of the Internet since its origins.
Peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations-entangling alliances with none.
The Internet should be recognized as a sovereign entity, and its contents should not be extraditable. The Internet should have its own lawmaking body.
The current proposals to give the UN (or the US, or any country) more power over the Internet undermine the Internet.
Law documents are currently long and complex. Adding to this complexity are amendments to the law, which are appended to the body of the original law but affect the previous text. This proposal posits that using modern version control systems and directly amending the law, would produce improved clarity, efficiency and accountability to the legislative process and to those who would consume the law after it is made.
The (Creative Inspiration of Reassessing Content Laws in an Electronic Era) Act or CIRCLE SQUARED Act, aims to reassess the nature of content in a digital era, by first stating a clear purpose for the nature and direction of the US copyright system. This law will supersed ALL laws currently enforced in the US, and require all nations that trade with US to follow these copyright laws.
If the software installed on a hardware is modifiable (eg the BIOS of a computer), the information needed to perform that modification must be available to the purchaser of the equipment.
For example, a computer with a secure boot with UEFI BIOS will either be sold together with the key or allows to add new keys.
The principle is that the buyer of an equipment shall always have full ownership of it.
If the user can not modify the software, it is not a sale but a lease.