

The Return Of The Broadcast Treaty - pwg
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110622/02575214801/return-broadcast-treaty.shtml

======
rglover
This is frightening. There is absolutely no rhyme or reason for this behavior
aside from greed. As someone just getting into the broadcast industry, I can't
personally think of any reason for this behavior. They claim it has something
to do with IP, but here, it seems like they're trying to claim rights got
something they didn't even create (and that it would be OK). There is
absolutely no reason a broadcaster deserves "special" rights to content. This
is the sign of an industry that's too resistant to change and not intelligent
enough to respond to it properly. Sad.

------
russell
I followed the links and got to a fuller explanation:
<http://importance.corante.com/archives/002925.html#more>

I am confused by both the perceived need and the perceived damage. I assumed
that the broadcast received copyright protection because of the production
artifacts other than the public domain original source. The treaty itself
seems to protect the specific broadcast, but does not prohibit other broadcast
of the same source material.

Am I missing something? I must be, otherwise why create such a treaty? Of
course, the mere existence of an organization such as WIPO means that they
have to create law, otherwise everyone would have to give up the high living
of Geneva and go home.

