Petition to the State Duma and the reaction of the “intellectual elite”

Recently, several activists (among whom there is the newspaper “Private Correspondent”, as well as “Wikimedia RU”) sent an open letter to the State Duma of the Russian Federation, which contained proposals for the modernization of copyright legislation:

1. Introduce the concept of free licenses into legislation;
2. Buy copyright on works included in the school curriculum;
3. Buy copyright on the classics of Soviet cinema;
4. To obligate to transfer to the public domain (or release under a free license) everything that is created with funds from the state budget;
5. Enter the freedom of the panorama (about the absurdity of her absence, see here )
6. Give libraries the right to digitize books without negotiation with the copyright holder;
7. Introduce copyright advice, which will be responsible for the collective management of the AP and issue licenses for the works, contacting the authors is difficult.

It is quite normal and reasonable requirements, is not it? Many of them are implemented in different countries of the world, for example, freedom of panorama or free licenses. However, the reaction of our “creative elite” soon followed.

It is described here . The journalist who wrote it showed simply miracles of non-engagement.

Let's start:

The authors of the letter (among them, film director Nikita Mikhalkov and General Director of Channel One Konstantin Ernst) are outraged by the appeal to the State Duma of a group of people who support the annulment of copyrights to all Soviet books and movies , as well as giving libraries the ability to digitize and publish books on the Internet without consent rights holders.

Compare the letter:

2. To organize a fair and consistent redemption of rights to all works in Russian that are part of a secondary school course [...]
3. To consider the possibility of redemption and subsequent transfer to the public domain of other works of literature and cinema, created in the Soviet period with state support .

The arrogance of these gentlemen is striking - to make money on six-year-old films created at the expense of the state, and to be indignant when they are offered to buy out the rights to them.

Further better:

Recall that copyright in Russia is protected by part 4 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, which, in particular, prohibits the use of works without signing a contract with the author and paying him remuneration. This norm (like the entire 4th part of the Civil Code) entered into force on January 1, 2008, however, in the opinion of those who applied to the State Duma, it is already outdated, demonstrates “obsolete approaches of the industrial age” and generally creates “insurmountable difficulties” that hinder “ development of society. "

Horrible. We propose to violate the rights of the authors. For example, buy movies of the deceased in 1948, Eisenstein.
')

To resolve the difficulties proposed the actual nationalization of copyright. First, it is proposed to introduce the notion of a “free irrevocable license” into the Civil Code, which will allow everyone to distribute certain works free of charge.

About the fact that such a license should consciously choose the author, of course, is silent.

Moreover, the signing of such licenses, in the opinion of those who applied to the State Duma, should be made mandatory for all authors creating works with the participation of Russian budgets of all levels. In other words, it is proposed to withdraw the rights to the products, for example, the largest film studios and television companies that create it with the support of the state budget.

And pass it on to people who pay their work through taxes?

In addition, unprecedented rights have been proposed to endow libraries: they should be able to digitize any books without the permission of the copyright holders, as well as the right to post any books online, including for money.

Horror. And now they place these books on their shelves. Almost always for the money.

We note that all these initiatives, lobbied in the State Duma, are currently qualified by the Civil Code as piracy and punishable under article 146 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation by imprisonment for up to six years. The desire to actually legitimize piracy is explained by the authors of the appeal to the State Duma by the tasks of "modernizing the Russian economy."

Yeah, especially free licenses. To legalize the possibility for taxpayers to have unhindered access to the products created from their own money.

The real outcome of the proposed measures may be the unrestricted possibility of commercial use of other people's intellectual property, "the letter says to the president.

I remind you that all the works of Russian classics of the XIX century are now published by publishers without paying anyone. That is exactly what is described in this quote. No one has suffered from this, right?

According to the chairman of the Union of Cinematographers of Russia, Nikita Mikhalkov, “piracy can exist only when it has a strong roof. About $ 4 billion the state loses on pirates. But, apparently, those who protect them have their share there ”.

Suddenly! The RSL and the Wikimedia RU Foundation are pirates. And Nikita Mikhalkov is white and fluffy, and the state (from taxes) should pay him money for films; in his opinion, by the way, taxes on clean DVDs should also come to him .

Conclusion: we all have to pay taxes on the arts of our “elite”, and the introduction of free licenses and the transfer to the public domain of the films created with our money is the “nationalization” of copyrights and robbing gentlemen like Ernst and Mikhalkov. From what you and congratulations. It is also characteristic that the “functionaries” of art mainly signed there: the director of Channel One, the president of the Union of Cinematographers, the director of Mosfilm, the head of Prof-Media, the head of the Writers' Union, the chairman of the Union of Architects.