Sunday, May 19, 2013
The Principles were developed in response to concerns that the fundamental right to freedom of expression guaranteed by the regional human rights instruments of the UN Human and almost all national constitutions, has been increasingly eroded by the purpose of protecting copyrights. The Internet has been the center of an alarming expansion of copyright claims at the expense of freedom of expression and, more generally, the protection of human rights. Those principles include the right to freedom of expression and the free flow of information and ideas can be considered marginal to this.
These principles are intended to establish a framework that can be used to first ensure that the right to freedom of expression and the ability to share knowledge and culture that is fully protected in the digital age, and secondly, that the interests of the author does not unduly restrict them. The Principles also aim to promote positive measures to promote the free flow of information, ideas, and better access to knowledge and culture through the Internet and beyond.
Freedom of expression - is the freedom of all individuals to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds - is the basis of the diversity of cultural expressions, creativity and innovation. It is, therefore, an essential element of the right to freely participate in the cultural life of society, enjoying the arts and to share in scientific advancement: the same benefits that copyright exists to promote.
The full article is well worth reading. It is available in a variety of languages, but we have incorporated the English version below. It is truly unfortunate that over the years, some have copyright over copyright maximalist increasingly used as a tool to stifle freedom of expression and speech when locked, describe the principles, purpose is supposed to be to encourage more speech. If we start from this principle, we can begin to look more closely at what a more reasonable policy might look like, and it's great to see people of Article 19 to jump into the fray. 
In this sense, it is quite ridiculous to see something like the World Intellectual Property Organization, "because the" intellectual property "- or, more precisely, patents, copyrights Copyrights and trademarks (leaving aside the other under) - should never be seen as an end in itself, or something to celebrate in itself point (officially speaking. although some argue that he had ulterior motives really) base in the United States was supposed to be a tool to "promote the progress" (copyright and patent) or act as a form of protection consumers (with notes). Unfortunately, we are far from ideal, in which the concept of blocking and closing of ideas, expression and style is considered an action quite reasonable under today's laws in part through research "intellectual property" in the name of "intellectual property". This is the distortion that is a very important part of the problem in various discussions on the subject. We went back to some of the fundamental principles of freedom of expression and to look at what is more conducive to freedom of expression, freedom of expression and creativity seems a good idea, instead of automatically assuming that "property intellectual "itself is the goal. 
Permalink | Comment | Email this story
Permalink | Comment | Email this story 
Find best price for : --Intellectual----Property--
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
0 comments:
Post a Comment