Untitled

http://www.ourfutureplanet.org/component/youtopia/aussman/issues/215

A most excellent proposal. However, I can see why that won't work. There are too many "cultures" and "areas" where individual freedoms and rights are oppressed not only by the state, but also by local society. Hence, though my heart aches with the burning desire to support this concept, I can just see the dangers that ride with it. In societies such as India, where honor killings are not only condoned, but often endorsed and instigated by the older members of a society, combined with India's dangerous tradition of unquestioningly obeying one's elders, such situations where progress is halted in the name of conserving culture would be inevitable.

Everything said and done, it has come to a point where I often feel that the Supreme Court of India is our only hope of fairness and progress. Indeed, sometimes I catch myself thinking of it as the literal house of justice. And, though, sometimes it speaks too late, and sometimes it doesn't speak loud enough, the conscience of the Court  reverberates with the words of the constitution, which is, in fact, the real saving grace of the Indian Nation (Not in the avatar of the State, however); regardless of whether its completely compiled or debated on for years, the Constitution of India is an epic document, length and detail set aside.

In fact, the length and detail is probably what made the Constitution the heart of our country's existence. Those stupid decisions and policies may be the result of an unhealthy mind, or a mind plagued by unhealthy thoughts, but the heart is what keeps one alive, cleansing the blood in order to pump it through the system again, always consistent. Always dependable. And, when it stops working, you may as well die. Because you will. Regardless of how smart you may be.

The Unconstitutionality of the AFSPA

The AFSPA is unconstitutional.

Either we admit that those people are the citizens of our country, and we grant them the same rights the rest of the Indians (are supposed to) enjoy, or we admit that they are a foreign territory that we are trying to keep under our control, and hence we do not grant them those rights.

If you think that an area is full of evil terrorists, you go in there with an act like the Special Powers act, it is shameful and pathetic if 5 years are not enough for you to regain control of a civilian population, no matter how many weapons they have.

If you can't manage in 5 years, take 5 more. Still no? Take 10 more. But, seriously, if 20 years are not enough for you to regain any sort of control, then that is just super pathetic. And that is your problem, not theirs. 50 freaking years? Really? Are you serious? 

That's just so sad, dude... That's just wrong. And intolerable. Unacceptable. Unconstitutional. And it should be punishable by death. Which still won't return the lives of the thousands of innocents who have been killed.

http://www.guernicamag.com/features/3282/mathur_12_1_11/

Fresh look on AFSPA – way you never thought before - Why the AFSPA is unconstitutional, and must be repealed immediately.

"The only solution, it seems, for redressing the deep anchored hatred and pain is an apology to the affected people and their subsequent economic advancement. So-called dialogues started by fat ministers, muffled scholars and cunning bureaucrats will not work. The Army or the police cannot help as they do not address the matters of the heart. If India has to be a true democracy then it has to show that the Rule by Law is also a Lawful Rule – starting with an investigation into who first thought of these unlawful acts that facilitated the murder of Indians.

Doubts about legitimacy of Indian rule in those places have to be cleared on an ideological level and at grass root, people-to-people levels. "

Of Iron ladies and Anonymous Ops.

Imagine being angry at something. Imagine this something permeating every aspect of every single day of your existence. Imagine it taking away your desire to do anything except oppose it, fight it, get rid of it. Now, imagine being unable to understand the very concept of futility. Imagine fighting and fighting and bleeding and falling and rising and fighting, while the crowd empties out, and only blackness is left behind to watch you. Imagine a cell that's just big enough to sleep in, and imagine the rage, the rage, the rage. Imagine the ghost of Justice weeping beside you in a cell, and you having the strength to console *her*, fight for *her*, when she should have been protecting *you*, watching over *you*.

Irom Chanu Sharmila has been on a hunger strike against the Armed Forces Special Power Act in Manipur since the 4th of November, 2000. The AFSPA, which is applicable only in Kashmir and the north-eastern states, gives the armed forces of India sweeping powers, to the extent that anyone, above the equivalent to a watchman's post in the force, has the authority to arrest, detain and Kill anyone on the suspicion of Militant activity. That's right. You don't have to be guilty. There doesn't have to be one shred of evidence against you. You could be anybody, doing anything. The Act translates to this: As long as you are part of the Central forces, you can murder anyone you want to, and no one can stop you, or even ask you why.

The extent of Abuse faced by the citizens of these States is alarming and nauseating. Every time I hear about another rape, another murder, another brutal senseless act of violence, it makes me want to flee the Country. How can we, as an entire Nation, just sit by and let something like this happen?? Why? Is it because Anna's corruption affects you, but the plight of the North-Eastern States does not? Or is it because we think ourselves "more Indian" than our counterparts?

The injustice is outrageous. The Silence, deafening. Her Story, heartbreaking.

What should she have done? What could she have done? What hasn't she done?

And now, if that wasn't enough, the NDAA enters the scene.

India has never been too big on individualism and promoting civil liberties. It's hard to concentrate on those things when nearly a third of the population is starving. But, the United States, now they have a reputation to uphold. An important one, if your national anthem mentions it..

This is not just a blow to the citizens of the US, or people who are somehow involved with the Nation; No, it is an affront to Freedom everywhere.

Don't fall, Land of the Free..

Your triumph or failure means everything..

Call to Arms

Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. Martin Luther King Jr.

The Only Promise I'm Keeping

A hundred years ago,

I would have promised you eternity

Now, I have nothing to offer

except, half baked forevers

and a screaming taciturnity

For, I know, I too am disintegrating..

And, I suppose I should have listened 

when you whispered to me

"Put down your sword"

But it was all too late

and, I have made my enemies

Yes, I wander these angry streets

where no one dares touch me

and I rage in the fear that it is only because

I wear the golden armor that you left behind

and though it's been fading all this time

no one really cares

about you, or I

except us.

Still,

I have little to fear

for every arrow is just another one

Until the last one is here

And, the day I meet one-too-many,

it shall only be you and I

Yes, then everyone would care, my darling

But, your armor, you see, would die

Regardless, of all else that fails me now

and all the scattered forgotten vows

Your voice is the only one I still remember

at the edge of a dimly-lit, distant December

I know, I'm sure to be there again

even if how or when, I can''t control

And, until that day arrives,

Love, I swear I'll carry your soul...

What is Copyright? A beginner's Guide

In light of all the pro, and anti, SOPA  love & hate that's been flooding the internet. Here's my two cents:

Introduction

Copyright refers to the set of exclusive rights given to creators for their literary, artistic and scientific works, so long as they exist in a material or tangible form.[1]  According to Copyright law, the author is the creator of an original expression in a work, and is also the owner of the copyright. In the absence of any agreement in writing whereby the copyright has been assigned to another party by the author himself. Generally, a copyright exists in an original work of authorship at the instant that the said work is fixed in any tangible form of expression.

In virtually all countries, without exception, copyrights are products of legislation.[2]

Most nations follow one of two systems relating to copyright: 1) Authors’ Rights Systems & 2) Copyright System. The differences between the two are most visible when comparing the rights and status of Authors in these systems, with those of the owners of copyright.[3] Authors themselves, usually enjoy a better status and representation in CMOs in author’s rights countries, wherein some such organizations don’t even include, as members, owners of derived rights (e.g. Publishers).[4] In copyright system countries, on the other hand, it is the entrepreneurs who appear to have the stronger role.[5]

Defining terms

The Berne Copyright Convention, which has been signed by most major nations, states that every creative work is copyrighted the moment it is “fixed” in some material form.[6] The UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act, 1988 defines an author as “the person who creates” the work, i.e. the creator, regardless of the type of work involved.[7] Hence, for copyright purposes, the writer of a novel or a play, the painter of a painting, the composer of a symphony, the choreographer of a ballet, etc. are all the authors.[8] The producer of a sound recording is its author.[9] In the case of films, both the principal director and the producer of the same are considered to be its authors.[10] Similarly, the person producing the broadcast or cable cast is its author.[11] 

On the other hand, ownership is transferrable. In a work created, the author is the first owner of the copyright, unless produced as a part of the author’s employment.[12] Though this ownership may leave the author of the work immediately upon his finishing it, at the instant of creation, the owner of copyright is the author.[13]

II. The Mass Media Phenomenon: The Printing Press to the internet

The emergence of the internet, followed by its consequent invasion into nearly every corner of the World, led to a redefinition of mass media in a new light; and scholars often compare the World Wide Web in terms of the revolutionary impact it has had, and is still in the process of having, to that of the printing press. In previous times, the concept and power of copyright was concentrated to a much higher degree than it is today, and can be traced back to privileges and monopolies that were granted to the printers of books. If one wanted to get a copy of a book, he would have to seek out these monopoly-holders and take their permission to literally copy the book on to blank sheets of paper.[14] The advent of the printing press is the reason most often cited for the growing interest in a formal protection for books, eventually resulting in the first general legislation for protecting the rights of authors, the British Statute of Anne, 1709.[15]

Up until the 1990s, copyright was mainly used by the entities it was aimed at: professional bodies; these were either legitimate (distributors, cable companies or broadcasters) or illegitimate (makers and distributors of pirated cassettes, and later, of CDs and DVDs). Usually, these entities were merely playing the role of intermediaries, and had no personal interest in the content themselves. The internet changed all of this, especially with the invention of peer-to-peer software. Starting with a centralized system known as Napster[16], the recording industry has been waging a constant war against file-sharing, evidence of the emergence of a strong social norm, the stopping of which would have been too risky, as enforcement of a legal norm considered unfair or unjustified by a majority of the concerned people is always arduous.[17]

Historically, the purpose of copyright was not to stop the flow of works, but to channel it, which is to say that copyright was never designed to forbid end-users from utilizing the work, and underlying policy objectives at the advent clearly demonstrate that the right of copyright was meant to be exercised by professionals, against other professionals.[18]

Today, there are three main organizations that regulate Copyright over the Internet: The Intellectual Property Corporation of Malaysia (MYIPO), the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) and the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA).

MYPIO

The Intellectual Property Corporation of Malaysia (MYIPO) is responsible for the enforcement of the Copyright Act 1987. MYIPO is an agency under the Ministry of Domestic Trade, Co-operation and Consumerism.[19]

Malaysian copyright law is strong and reflects current international copyright protection norms.[20] In 1997 an amendment was introduced on the lines of the U.S. Digital Millennium Act. Software was included in the list of copyrightable material and unauthorised transferring of copyrighted material over the internet and tampering with security measures that are embedded in software to prevent unauthorized copying are now akin to copyright infringement.[21]

MPAA

The Motion Picture Association of America was founded in 1922 to advance the interests of its members.  As a result, it operates in a multitude of spheres including safeguarding the intellectual property rights of its members. MPAA's members are the six major U.S. motion picture studios: Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures; Paramount Pictures Corporation; Sony Pictures etc.[22]

MPAA has filed lawsuits against servers[23] and torrent websites[24] to check illegal download of copyrighted content. In order to discourage people from illegally downloading copyrighted content innovative measures such as the “You wouldn’t steal a car”[25] video were widely broadcasted. MPAA claims that during 2006, 75 such servers were shut down due to their actions.[26] But MPAA is not enough to curb the internet piracy as even today there are hundreds of websites that allow one to illegally download any cinematograph film which may or may not be under copyright protection.

RIAA   

The Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) is a trust which functions on similar lines as the MPAA as far as protecting the interests of its members, i.e. individual record owners,[27] goes. Thus it is responsible for collective rights management of sound recordings. 

RIAA also initially engaged in taking direct action against file service providers[28] and individuals[29] who illegally obtained copyrighted content from such websites. RIAA has now moved to work with ISPs to use a three-strike warning system for file sharing and once the third strike has been confirmed, the internet service of the infringing individual will be disconnected altogether.[30]

Remember:

The Author and the copyright owner are not always the same, the former being the creator of the work, and the latter referring to the person having “plenary control” of the said work.[31]

---

[1] A copyright refers to the exclusive statutory rights, given to the creator, for the exercise of control over any copying, and any other exploitation, of the works, for a specified amount of time. The owner of a copyright thus, can be said to possess a positive set of rights, as well as a negative one; The former being an exclusive right to copy and otherwise manipulate the copyrighted work, including the right to license others to do so, while the latter refers to the right to prevent anyone else from doing the same without the consent of the creator, who has legal remedies available to him. See ‘Defining Copyright’ available at http://www.articlesbase.com/copyright-articles/defining-copyright-2514882.html#ixzz1Tg3l76cv last visited on 04^th August 2011.

[2] World Intellectual Property Organization, WIPO guide on the licensing of copyright and related rights by WIPO (Geneva: WIPO, 2004). Though, there is no such thing as an “international copyright” to protect one’s work throughout the world, most countries are members of the Berne Convention and the Universal Copyright Convention, allowing for the protection of one’s works in Countries wherein one is not a citizen. See “About Copyright” World Copyright Information available at http://www.world-copyright.net/home.shtml last visited on 04th August 2011.

[3] Id. While the copyright system is based on a nearly purely market-based approach, focusing on the property aspect of copyright, the focal point of Collective Management Organizations in Authors Rights Societies seem to be primarily composed of taking care of the needs of the authors, instead of the entrepreneurs, thus adopting a comprehensive approach, which includes economic as well as social and cultural aspects. The differences are visible by inspecting the nomenclature; Referred to as collecting societies in copyright systems, they give the illusion of a purely economic role, limited to the function of ‘collection’ of fees from the users instead of distributing the same to the authors, which is obviously false. On the other hand, Authors rights countries often have more comprehensive terms for the CMOs, ranging from ‘societies of authors’ to the ‘societies for protection (or safeguard) of rights’., reflecting their wide-ranging approach to the subject. In the copyright system, these organizations mainly exercise the mere economic role of administering copyright collectively, in the Authors rights setup, theses organizations often have additional social and cultural roles, sometimes being mandatory by law. In the latter, CMOs are usually also seen as cultural organizations, requiring a sense of unity and camaraderie amongst the authors.

[4] often even given the designation of “Authors societies”

[5] Slike Von Lewinski, International Copyright Law and Policy 61 (UK: Oxford University Press, 2008).

[6] Article 2(2), Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works. Article 5(2) of the Convention expressly prohibits all member nations from insisting upon compliance with formal procedures as a pre-condition for protection of works by foreign authors protected by the said convention. See Sheldon W. Halpern, David E. Shipley & Howard B. Abrams, Copyright Cases and Materials 296 (Minnesota: West Publishing Co.. 1998).

[7] Sec. 9(1), Copyright, Designs and Patents Act, 1988: Authorship of work “(1) In this Part “author”, in relation to a work, means the person who creates it.”

[8] Thomas Hays & Claire Milne, Intellectual Property Law in Practice 185 (UK: W. Green & Son, 2004].

[9] S. 9(2)(aa), CDPA, 1988.

[10] 9(2)(ab), CDPA, 1988.

[11] 9(2)(b), CDPA, 1988.

[12] Ss. 11(1) and (2), CDPA, 1988.

[13] Thomas Hays & Claire Milne, Intellectual Property Law in Practice 185 (UK: W. Green & Son, 2004].

[14] The oldest recorded case based on an action for the right to copy deals with a text known as the Cathach, from Ancient Ireland. The text is the oldest existing Irish manuscript of the Psalter containing a Vulgate version of Psalms XXX (10) to CV (13). See ‘The Cathach/The Psalter of St. Coumba’ available at http://www.ria.ie/Library/Special-Collections/Manuscripts/Cathach.aspx last visited on 04th August 2011.

[15] Joseph S. Dubin, ‘The Universal Copyright Convention’, 42(1) California Law Review, Inc. 92 (1954). Also see: Statute of Anne 1709 “An Act for the Encouragement of Learning, by vesting the Copies of Printed Books in the Authors or purchasers of such Copies, during the Times therein mentioned” available at http://www.copyrighthistory.org/cgi-bin/kleioc/0010/exec/ausgabe/%22uk_1710%22 last visited on 03^rd August 2011.

[16] Napster was shut down after injunctions were issued by various US Courts. See A&M Records Inc v. Napster Inc., 284 F, 3d 1091 (9^th Cir. 2002) cf. Daniel Gervais, Collective Management of Copyright and Related Rights 7 (The Netherlands: Kluwer Law International, 2006).

[17]Daniel Gervais, Collective Management of Copyright and Related Rights 8 (The Netherlands: Kluwer Law International, 2006).

[18] Id.  Similar to the effect of the printing press, the internet has the potential to make laws and decisions easily accessible to the public, which in turn could make the administration of copyrights more transparent, and the authority of central organizations stronger. Also See: Ang, Peng Hwa and James A. Dewar, ‘Back to the Future of the Internet: The Printing Press’ available at http://lirne.net/resources/netknowledge/ang.pdf last visited on 04th August 2011.

[19] Available at http://www.myipo.gov.my/ last visited on 03^rd August 2011.

[20] Malaysia is a signatory to the World Intellectual Property Organization’s (WIPO) Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works, and boasts strong domestic copyright legislation.

[21] Section 2(f) which provided the definition of Literary work and Section 41 dealing with infringement were amended to cover electronic media as well, Copyright (Amendment) Act 1997.

[22] Motion Picture Association of America available at www.mpaa.org/about last visited on 03rd August 2011.

[23] Razorback 2 was shut down as a result of the action taken by MPAA. See ‘MPAA Press Release, 23.02.2006’ available at http://www.mpaa.org/press_releases/2006_02_23.pdf last visited on 04th August 2011.

[24] MPAA has filed multiple suits against various torrents, such as Pirate Bay. Raids were conducted on the office of Pirate Bay and servers were seized. Arrests were also made. But three days later, Pirate Bay was functional again. See ‘MPAA Press Release, 22.09.2005’ available at  http://www.mpaa.org/press_releases/2005_09_22.pdf last visited on 04th August 2011.

A similar attempt was made to shut down Hotfile. Jacqui Cheng ‘MPAA sues Hotfile for “staggering” copyright infringement’ Law & Disorder: Tech law and policy in the Digital Age available at http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/02/mpaa-sues-hotfile-for-copyright-infringement-on-a-staggering-scale.ars last visited on 04th August 2011.

[25] “You wouldn’t Steal a Car” Youtube available at www.youtube.com/watch?v=HmZm8vNHBSU last visited on 03^rd August 2011.

[26] Razorback 2 was shut down as a result of the action taken by MPAA. See ‘MPAA Press Release, 23.02.2006’ available at http://www.mpaa.org/press_releases/2006_02_23.pdf last visited on 04th August 2011.

[27] RIAA available at http://www.riaa.com/aboutus.php?content_selector=about-who-we-are-riaa last visited on 04^th August 2011.

[28] Andrew Orlowski ‘"I poisoned P2P networks for the RIAA" – whistleblower Gobbles fesses up to hoax’ available at http://www.theregister.co.uk/2003/01/17/i_poisoned_p2p_networks/ last visited on 02^nd August 2011.

[29] Andrew Orlowski ‘RIAA chief invokes Martin Luther King in pigopoly defense’ available at http://www.theregister.co.uk/2003/03/18/riaa_chief_invokes_martin_luther/ last visited on 03^rd August 2011.

[30] ‘Verizon backtrack on three-strike disconnect claim’ available at http://www.thecmuwebsite.com/article/verizon-backtrack-on-three-strike-disconnect-claim/ last visited on 03^rd August 2011.

[31] Alka Chawla, Copyright and Related Rights 74 (Delhi: Macmillan India Limited, 2007).

RATM and Anti-Authoritarian

I was talking to Ko last night, and he told me that RATM instantly appealed to anybody who was anti-authoritarian, and I launched off into a whole speech about how I wasn't anti-authoritarian, but just doing what I wanted, whether or not the authorities had something to say about it. Being an instinctively curious person by nature, I had to see what it was that I claimed I was not being. Turns out that being an Anti-authoritarian isn't about what I thought it was. It's impossible not to feel silly at this juncture, but at least I found out, right? I should know. And now I do.

Ah well, the RATM thing makes sense then. Power to you, Ko. I know you'll read this some day. <3

Ah, so much to learn, so much to do. I suppose beginning those assignments would be a decent start.

Stay Strong!

Peace.

Everything Stays the Same

The need

To bleed

Is not easily ignored

The words

They’re gone

They don’t love me anymore

And I

Am not me

Haven’t been so in too long

My veins

Are empty

My thoughts, always wrong

And I wait

In vain

For anything to change

But I’m trapped

And lost

And everything stays the same