US Didn't Sign The WIPO Treaty For The Blind
from the ah,-look-at-that dept
We were happy to see that the WIPO treaty for the visually impaired was finally completed and signed following the negotiations in Marrakech, where the MPAA did everything it could to try to kill or water down the agreement, with the US negotiating delegation acting as the MPAA’s happy lap dogs. So, I guess it shouldn’t be much of a surprise to see that while 51 countries signed the agreement in Marrakech, the United States was not among them.
Now, you can argue that the US should have time to look over the agreement, or maybe run it through Congress first — but, of course, when it comes to agreements that simply expand copyright, such as ACTA, the US stepped right up to sign right away, without having any open discussion or asking Congress to approve it. Furthermore, merely signing the document is different from ratifying it, so the US could have signed the document, and decided whether to fully ratify it later if it was really concerned. But, instead, the US simply decided not to sign at all, even as other countries decided to do so.
Filed Under: blind, marrakech, treaties, us, wipo treaty
Comments on “US Didn't Sign The WIPO Treaty For The Blind”
Disappointing but not surprising.
“I’m beginning to wonder who’s really the blind one around here.”
– Toph Beifong
Re: Re:
Toph is best bender.
Re: Re:
They’re not blind so much as bought and corrupt.
What are the consequences of the United States not signing?
Re: Consequences of not signing
None.
Re: Re: Consequences of not signing Take 2
From Treaties.UN.org Website:
By signature, the State has not expressed its consent to be bound by the treaty, which does not occur until the State ratifies, accepts or approves the treaty. Signature does mean that a State is obliged, in good faith, to refrain from acts that would defeat the object and purpose of the treaty (articles 18 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties of 1969).
The US will now be the first country to say that being as they never signed this treaty then this treaty is not lawful and valid in their eyes and will not be honoured at all.
Honestly the treaty was not very well designed for the american mess of a copyright system. It was much more appropriate for the far more clear and more oppressive european system.
The thing that is desperately needed is a legal quantitative de minimus use of copyrighted material. That would go a long way in making the system less intolerable.
Re: Re:
Oppressive how?
unless the nsa CAN SEE IT
they aint wantin to be part of it
so, anyone want further proof of who is actually running the country and ultimately, trying/wanting to run the world? let’s face it, think of how deep a pile of shit we would be in if we could never watch another movie or listen to another album. well, the world would just curl up and die!!
So who DID it sign it for?
Must be though to be blind in the US eh?