FC: RIAA replies to John Gilmore on Ukraine: Don't cheer piracy!

From: Declan McCullagh (declanat_private)
Date: Thu Jan 03 2002 - 14:42:17 PST

  • Next message: Declan McCullagh: "FC: ACLU investigation says Tampa facecam system a flop, a farce"

    Previous messages:
    
    "John Gilmore on Ukraine doing the right thing, fighting RIAA"
    http://www.politechbot.com/p-02983.html
    
    "U.S. says Ukraine turns blind eye to piracy, levies tariffs"
    http://www.politechbot.com/p-02977.html
    
    Jano tells me this response is from Neil Turkewitz, Sr. VP for 
    International Relations at the RIAA.
    
    -Declan
    
    ---
    
    From: JCabreraat_private
    To: declanat_private
    Message-ID: <OFFFAC57DD.D50756A5-ON85256B36.007B17CBat_private>
    Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2002 17:26:29 -0500
    
    
    I just read John Gilmore's e-mail concerning the imposition of US sanctions
    on Ukraine for its failure to adequately protect intellectual property, and
    thought that I would spend a few minutes to provide the real story for
    anyone who is interested.
    
    First of all, it is absolutely true that the US has imposed economic
    sanctions on Ukraine as a consequence of its failure to deal with CD
    piracy. In doing so, the Administration faithfully implemented the
    directions that it was given by Congress under the statute known as
    "Special 301" under which Congress directed the Administration to impose
    such sanctions on countries that fail to adequately and effectively protect
    intellectual property. Now of course, Mr. Gilmore did not have this
    completely correct. Gilmore suggests that sanctions were imposed because
    the Ukrainians failed to adopt an "optical media licensing regime." The
    reality is that while the vote on this licensing regime may have been the
    final act precipitating the introduction of sanctions, the sanctions were
    not introduced because of the Rada's rejection of the bill, but because the
    Government of Ukraine had violated nearly every provision of a US-Ukraine
    agreement reached in June of 2000 under which it committed to take a number
    of steps to address runaway pirate production.
    
    The proposed optical media licensing regime was a critical part of the
    infrastructure without which efforts to address piracy would surely fail,
    and the failure of the Ukrainian Parliament (Rada) to pass it had much more
    to do with the influence exerted by the pirates than it did with the notion
    of freedom fighting. Gilmore's support for the supposed courage of those
    who rejected this legislation is greatly misplaced, and mistakes corruption
    and influence for vision and bravery.  Unchecked pirate production in
    Ukraine puts money in the pockets of organized criminal syndicates, and
    severely undermines the position of Ukrainian and foreign authors,
    performers, composers and record companies. More fundamentally, piracy
    undermines Ukraine's economic future and its ability to attract investment
    and to compete in the global economy. It is my sense that this is nothing
    to cheer about. If Gilmore did his homework, he would know that organized
    crime, corruption and bribery are some of the principal impediments to
    economic and social development in much of Eastern Europe, the CIS and
    Russia. If Gilmore truly wants to promote the overthrow of oppression, he
    should support measures designed to introduce the rule of law and to create
    a fair playing field where the old guard is not in control. Sadly, he
    laments such measures.
    
    The proposed regulations are entirely content neutral and are based on a
    single practical observation--CD plants that are manufacturing pirate
    copies are unlikely to want to have their names appear on the discs that
    they manufacture. By requiring manufacturers to place a unique identifier
    on all discs that they press, and adopting mechanisms to ensure compliance,
    countries can effectively create deterrents to pirate production. For most
    countries, this is a far more attractive solution than trying to deal with
    piracy after product has already been manufactured, and involves far less
    government expenditure, surveillance, and other intrusions into private
    spaces. Gilmore should support initiatives such as the optical media
    licensing law that are aimed at stopping piracy in relatively public (or at
    least commercial) settings like CD plants.
    
    Gilmore calls this proposed legislation "just another smokescreen for the
    music mafia." Little did he realize how true these words were, for indeed
    opposition to content neutral legislation that would have helped Ukraine to
    address piracy was indeed the work of the "music mafia," but not in the
    sense that Gilmore intended.
    
    
    
    
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    POLITECH -- Declan McCullagh's politics and technology mailing list
    You may redistribute this message freely if you include this notice.
    Declan McCullagh's photographs are at http://www.mccullagh.org/
    To subscribe to Politech: http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html
    This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Jan 03 2002 - 15:18:12 PST