On Fri, 3 Mar 2000, Bruce Arnold wrote:
> Speaking as an individual (so pls disregard the dot gov dot au address) directly
>involved with intellectual property policy development in government over a number of
>years, "ranting" online within the comfort of a newsgroup such as LINK about the
>latest street-theatre from the MPAA is as irrelevant as the Naderite proposals for
>'dot dolphinsafe', 'dot gmofree' and 'dot rainforestfriendly' domains
>
> If you want substantive change you need to make a cogent, sustained case to the
>players
> + within government - eg Richard Alston as well as Darryl Wiliams (Alston shares
>responsibility for copyright with Williams, his department oversights both online
>policy and the media industries)
> + within Parliament
> + within the media.
Well, the media bit I can handle. As to Senator Alston, last time I
checked, I was a "maniac". As to the other parts of parliament, if there
was some way I could reliably get in touch with them using means other
than writing a letter on paper or calling one of their staff that could at
best summarise a conversation as "some techy guy called me up about
circumvention devices". I really can't see the avenues for anybody
operating primarily online to lobby anybody in Government especially when
the campaign last year about Internet Content Regulation saw some pollies
simply filtering out email on the topic.
> Does your local member, for example, know what's happening? And does that member
>have any idea of the implications? Any idea that it might involve votes? Is it
>something that he/she will read about in the local paper or the Sydney Morning
>Herald? Can it be reduced to a sound-bite?
My local member wouldn't know a circumvention device from a compact disc
of Barry Manilow. I tried during the Content Regulation thing with my
best and most persuasive voice. He was a dud.
I take your point, Bruce, but as long as people like my local member
continue to tow a party line and guys like the one from the MPAA can get
an instant meeting with Daryl Williams to discuss such things (who
wouldn't with an import industry of what - several billion?), it's a dead
loss.
Grant
> >>> Danny Yee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 03/03/00 02:23pm >>>
> Grant Bayley wrote:
> > I should say before pasting that I intend to tell these clowns that they
> > can shove their request where the sun does not regularly shine. The gall
> > of them suggesting that I, an Australian citizen, should fall into line
> > with a temporary injunction from a United States District Court (in the
> > Southern District of New York and in California), is just preposterous,
>
> But to make sure it *stays* preposterous, I think we need to do some
> lobbying of our government. Perhaps we should run a petition on the
> subject, or organise a letter-writing campaign, or something. If we
> remain silent, or just do "online things" (mirroring, ranting in places
> like link and slug), then I fear the Commonwealth Attorney-General will
> bow to MPAA pressure and revise the law.
>
> Danny.
>
>
--
SLUG - Sydney Linux Users Group Mailing List - http://www.slug.org.au
To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
unsubscribe in the text
