[WikiEN-l] Copyright situation

Mon Sep 5 18:13:27 UTC 2005

If the thread was about copyright then dragging in other matters that 
are unrelated can only create confusion.  I agree that there are many 
aspects of Iranian law where human rights are not properly respected, 
but that does not justify our ignoring whatever other rights Iran may 
have allowed to its citizens.  If Iran already gives its citizens 
copyright protections that are substantially less than what is available 
in most other countries, how can one justify reducing those protections 
even further?  Speculating about Iranian motives for not participating 
in international agreements is not helpful; not paying foreign copyright 
holders is indeed a consequence, but that does not make it a motive.

Of course, much of copyright law is not about ethics.  The Disney 
Corporation has done much to establish that fact.  Law and ethics 
frequently diverge.  Ethics underlie the spirit of law, and the ethical 
person acts out of a conviction that what he is doing is right, and not 
because he is so obliged by the word of written laws.  It's true to say 
that we are not bound to follow Iranian laws, but that does not prevent 
us from respecting them out of our own sense of fairness.

Ec

Fastfission wrote:

>I wasn't referring to a copyright provision, I was referring to their other 
>well-known restrictive laws. I'm not sure I buy the "ethical validity" 
>argument, in part because I'm not so sure I, in my heart of hearts, think 
>that copyright is about ethics much these days (and suspect that Iran's lack 
>of participation in foreign copyright agreements is done so more for their 
>own benefit -- not having to pay foreign copyright holders -- than it does 
>in inducing any loss-of-profit for the Iranian government or Iranian 
>citizens).
>
>But anyway -- my response was just meant to say, "Well, I don't think we're 
>legally bound to follow Iranian laws on this or much anything else." Even if 
>that's *true* (I'm the first to admit I'm not very well versed in 
>international law), it doesn't *necessarily* imply any particular course of 
>action. The censorship example was just to illustrate that if we tried to 
>follow every country's individual content laws about everything, we'd have 
>no encyclopedia.
>
>FF
>
>On 8/7/05, Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net> wrote:
>  
>
>>There is some ethical validity to respecting Iranian copyright law
>>whether or not an obligation exists. Iran's failure to participate in
>>international treaties on the matter should not be a primary concern.
>>Infringement of Iranian copyrights are still infringements even if US
>>courts would not consider those laws. Copyright terms in Iran (life +
>>30) are still shorter than in most countries, so there would be no need
>>to extend them beyond that time. I'm not aware of any Iranian copyright
>>provision regarding the depiction of women, and you admit that you don't
>>know about that either. That aspect seems like a red herring.
>>