 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
Jason Pielemeier reports (lightly edited):
Marathon session today lasted until 10:30pm. Seemed like the chair was really pushing the issues. He sort of piled through limitations and exceptions and TPMs after lunch despite the fact there was very little consensus on any of this.
Webcasting, the 10,000 pound gorilla, is scheduled for first thing tomorrow . . . The chair already hinted that he will likely create two seperate draft treaties each with its own timetable - one on broadcast and the other on webcasting. . . . Brazil continues to be very tough. . . . Meanwhile australia and canada seemed to have cooled on several parts of the treaty (principally retransmission) and that's helping too. Finally, US Telecom Association came out with a fantastic statement-paper (since no NGOs have been able to talk yet), that I think is worth quoting from briefly:
"USTelecom believes... these concerns can be addressed by narrowing the scope of the Treaty to prohibit signal theft... the webcasting portion of the Treaty should be deleted... should be revised to permit transmissions of signals w/in the home... should ensure that intermediary carriers are not exposed to liability."
Obviously the last issue is the one that matters most to them, but the fact that they are even here pushing this is a testament in part to WPPT/WCT, but also in a big way to the great work that Gwen Hinze (EFF), Jamie Love (CPTech) and others have been doing. . . .
|
|
 |
| |
 |
Login |
 |
 |
Don't have an account yet? You can create one. As a registered user you have some advantages like theme manager, comments configuration and post comments with your name. |
|
 |
 |
Related Links |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
Article Rating |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
Options |
 |
No Comments Allowed for Anonymous, please register |
|
|