Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Belgian Rightsholders Group Wants To Charge Libraries For Reading Books To Kids

Soulskill posted more than 2 years ago | from the also-wants-royalties-on-all-waffles dept.

Books 244

New submitter BSAtHome writes "People with a healthy interest in fundamental freedoms and basic human rights have probably heard about SABAM, the Belgian collecting society for music royalties, which has become one of the global poster children for how outrageously out-of-touch-with-reality certain rightsholders groups appear to be. This morning, word got out in Belgian media that SABAM is spending time and resources to contact local libraries across the nation, warning them that they will start charging fees because the libraries engage volunteers to read books to kids. Volunteers. Who – again – read books to kids."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Crazy! (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39390527)

What's next, having to pay money to sing in the shower?

Re:Crazy! (4, Insightful)

nurb432 (527695) | more than 2 years ago | (#39390553)

Yes, if anyone can hear you sing.

Re:Crazy! (5, Insightful)

davester666 (731373) | more than 2 years ago | (#39390665)

It's not if anyone CAN hear you sing.

It's if anyone CAN POSSIBLY hear you sing.

For example, if there is room in your bathroom for somebody else to stand, you would need to pay because you could possibly have a roommate standing there listening. And it's too much trouble to track whether or not somebody is there listening, it's just much easier copyright math to charge you assuming you are putting on a public performance.

Re:Crazy! (4, Informative)

Sipper (462582) | more than 2 years ago | (#39391031)

Yes, if anyone can hear you sing.

I wish it weren't true, but sadly it is. This is why in the U.S. when you are given a "birthday cake" by a restaraunt, the waitresses cannot sing the standard "happy birthday" song and instead have to make up their own tune and their own lyrics, which don't invoke the same feelings that the standard song would have if they were allowed to sing it. This is an area of copyrights that I find invasive and counterproducitve.

Re:Crazy! (5, Informative)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | more than 2 years ago | (#39391083)

Slight correction: The *tune* is actually past copyright. They can use the tune if they want. The words were written some time later, to fit the pre-existing tune, and remain copyrighted. So they could sing something else to the tune of happy birthday.
"Happy song-day to you,
We wrote this for you.
We'd sing you the real one,
But it's copyright too."

Re:Crazy! (5, Informative)

sourcerror (1718066) | more than 2 years ago | (#39390559)

Didn't you get the memo? Even birdsongs are copyrighted.

Re:Crazy! (4, Informative)

sourcerror (1718066) | more than 2 years ago | (#39390575)

Here's the link to relevant story: link [slashdot.org]

Re:Crazy! (2)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 2 years ago | (#39390567)

Do your showers constitute public performances? If so, rightsholders want their cut.

Re:Crazy! (2)

QuantumLeaper (607189) | more than 2 years ago | (#39390597)

Only if you leave the window open...

Re:Crazy! (1)

aurizon (122550) | more than 2 years ago | (#39390727)

That is a good suggestion, humming and musical reminiscences as well (at a lower rate, of course). If they read this - -it will happen...

Re:Crazy! (5, Insightful)

thomst (1640045) | more than 2 years ago | (#39390753)

Yes, it's crazy all right.

These Belgian swine aren't legally permitted to charge children to BORROW these same books from the library and read them THEMSELVES, but they somehow have decided that they have the right to charge THE LIBRARY, if an adult reads them ALOUD to the same children?

Apparently it takes a Belgian lintellectual property awyer to dumb down a village ...

Re:Crazy! (4, Informative)

CRCulver (715279) | more than 2 years ago | (#39390793)

These Belgian swine aren't legally permitted to charge children to BORROW these same books from the library and read them THEMSELVES

I don't know about Belgium, but in many European countries libraries pay an annual fee to copyright holders to partly compensate them for perceived lost sales. Also, some European cities don't have the concept of free public libraries, and some kind of annual membership fee is required. Thus, even if the children aren't paying anything, their parents are.

By the way, on Slashdot you can use the bold and italic HTML tags for the sake of emphasis, not need to write in caps which looks like SHOUTING.

Re:Crazy! (-1, Troll)

chilvence (1210312) | more than 2 years ago | (#39390913)

THANK YOU FOR THE 1990'S NETIQUETTE LESSON

Re:Crazy! (4, Interesting)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | more than 2 years ago | (#39391105)

I like to use the *old* for emphesis. Not because it's any better, but because it's a throwback to a time when we didn't need any of these fancy typesetting things to convey tone. ASCII was good enough then, and (with the addition of a bit of unicode for non-english text and math) it's good enough now.

Re:Crazy! (1)

the eric conspiracy (20178) | more than 2 years ago | (#39391129)

The topic of this story is so annoying I feel like it warrants USE OF BOTH

Re:Crazy! (1)

Sique (173459) | more than 2 years ago | (#39391225)

You want to USE BOTH?

Re:Crazy! (-1, Flamebait)

Hognoxious (631665) | more than 2 years ago | (#39391261)

I don't know about Belgium

I do. The beer is excellent, the people are utter cunts.

Re:Crazy! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39391319)

By the way, on Slashdot you can use the bold and italic HTML tags for the sake of emphasis, not need to write in caps which looks like SHOUTING.

Or, since we are being pedantic, you could use the em tag for emphasis.

Re:Crazy! (1)

FreedomOfThought (2544248) | more than 2 years ago | (#39391043)

Well if you are like most people and don't sing entire songs whilst showering, then you may be able to argue "Fair Use" or something... What am I thinking!? Yes you will have to pay!

Re:Crazy! (4, Funny)

Pharmboy (216950) | more than 2 years ago | (#39391109)

What's next, having to pay money to sing in the shower?

Well, if there is an audience, yes. And it is about time they started making these freeloading children pay their fair share for entertainment. The librarians can always pay for the royalties by simply speaking a commercial every chapter. That way kids can learn about other important thinks like Coke, and the new Barbie. /sarcasm

Re:Crazy! (1)

Trax3001BBS (2368736) | more than 2 years ago | (#39391267)


"outrageously out-of-touch-with-reality"

Pretty much hits it on the head.

Re:Crazy! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39391317)

If people hear you in the shower, yes, the law says you must pay !

Otherwise you're just a thief that's stealing food from the mouths of poor creative people's families, and should get 100 years hard labour and fines equivelent to the lost revenue from all the people who may have ever heard you singing and may have then decided not to bother to go to all 40 of their concerts, buy all 20+ albums and all available T-shirts, posters and other crap.

You steal milions of dollars from the hungry mouths of children of those in the creative industries - because you believe you have some "right" to sing and then expect mercy?

Lets hope to god you didn't actually speak the names of pirate websites - because that's just as bad, and in the UK you'll be shoved on a plane to the US even if they don't want you (suspicion is enough - hey, they might not even find any evidence!) but they'll hold you without trial like you might have leaked top secret embassy messages, until they decide to not bring a case.

God bless America ! (but please don't sing that with a performance licence)

Outrageous (5, Funny)

Vlaix (2567607) | more than 2 years ago | (#39390533)

And the kids should be charged with laziness. I mean, really, can't they read the books by themselves ? A generation of slackers, I call it.

Re:Outrageous (2)

Chrisq (894406) | more than 2 years ago | (#39390707)

And the kids should be charged with laziness. I mean, really, can't they read the books by themselves ? A generation of slackers, I call it.

If its like the UK library groups it will be someone reading things like "The Gruffalo" to three and four year olds.

Re:Outrageous (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39390805)

Not on my watch pirate!

Re:Outrageous (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39391223)

Sure, they are, how not to blame little brats for not being able to read when they are age 3?

Re:Outrageous (2, Funny)

Hognoxious (631665) | more than 2 years ago | (#39391277)

I could read when I was 3. I could speak full sentences when I was 1.

But then I'm not a fucking Belgian.

Evil and stupid, good work guys... (5, Insightful)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 2 years ago | (#39390541)

Psst. I heard this rumor that volunteers nurturing an enthusiasm for books in youngsters is what we call "free advertising" and "preserving the future of your market".

I'd bet you a considerable sum of money that whatever you'll manage to wring out of volunteer reading groups at public libraries won't amount to 2/5ths fuck-all compared to the amount you'll lose because the larval Belgians are going to be growing up with fewer books and more of whatever other entertainment is available.

There are times when being evil pays good money. This. Isn't. One. Of. Them. Dumbass.

Re:Evil and stupid, good work guys... (5, Insightful)

Imrik (148191) | more than 2 years ago | (#39390723)

But it will improve next quarter's profits, and that's all that matters.

Re:Evil and stupid, good work guys... (5, Insightful)

erroneus (253617) | more than 2 years ago | (#39390875)

This is *NOT* about the interests of the publishers. This is ALL about the interests of the lawyers who seek to benefit by suiing everyone they possibly can. That they are harming their "clients" business in the long term does not bother them in the slightest.

The **AA and all of them are a bunch of lawyers with their own interests at heart. Sure, their clients 'allow' it to happen, but most of the time, they act quite autonomously and independently of their clients as can be shown by the numerous times these groups have sued over materials they don't hold the rights to.

Re:Evil and stupid, good work guys... (5, Funny)

laejoh (648921) | more than 2 years ago | (#39391075)

the larval Belgians

me shudders in a lovecraftian kinda way

SABAM members don't have kids (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39390545)

Obviously. And they don't know how to read either. Why these people exist in this world ?

Re:SABAM members don't have kids (1)

game kid (805301) | more than 2 years ago | (#39390627)

Of course they don't have kids. Like the amoebas they try to intellectually emulate, they reproduce by binary fission.

Re:SABAM members don't have kids (0)

the eric conspiracy (20178) | more than 2 years ago | (#39391153)

I thought people like this were what you got from anal sex.

Say What? (5, Insightful)

Just Another Perl Ha (7483) | more than 2 years ago | (#39390549)


I'm sorry... but these greedy fucking cunts need to be taken out back and horse-whipped!!!

Re:Say What? (1, Offtopic)

Just Another Perl Ha (7483) | more than 2 years ago | (#39390563)

Oops... sorry... my Texas was showing... :D

Re:Say What? (2)

6ULDV8 (226100) | more than 2 years ago | (#39390589)

You have to careful letting that show in Austin. You'll get a ticket.

Re:Say What? (2)

oodaloop (1229816) | more than 2 years ago | (#39390905)

I'd horsewhip you if I had a horse!

Re:Say What? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39391081)

for shame using a poor defenseless horse to whip someone

I'm tell PETA on you

Re:Say What? (1)

buybuydandavis (644487) | more than 2 years ago | (#39390969)

I thought Texas was one of the worst offenders for ridiculous intellectual property laws, and was a preferred court venue for IP shakedowns.

Re:Say What? (2, Insightful)

s-whs (959229) | more than 2 years ago | (#39390745)

I'm sorry... but these greedy fucking cunts need to be taken out back and horse-whipped!!!

This shows the moderation system on slashdot just doesn't work in some cases. This is not flamebait, this is a realistic depiction of what justice is supposed to be in cases like this!

Language might be a little unappropriate, but that's nothing when compared to the action of these sabam a-holes!

Public outrage. (2)

stevenh2 (1853442) | more than 2 years ago | (#39390557)

Once this gets into the mainstream media, there will be public outrage. If that doesn't top it, what will, after all SABAM will bribe all the people that make laws.

Re:Public outrage. (4, Funny)

Smallpond (221300) | more than 2 years ago | (#39390673)

There's a $30 charge for outrage. Sony owns the rights to it at the moment.

Re:Public outrage. (5, Informative)

CharlyFoxtrot (1607527) | more than 2 years ago | (#39391347)

It did. The story is about a week old. After it broke SABAM claimed that the library in question does pay about 250 EUR, but it isn't for reading books but for music played in the library. SABAM said that it does collect money for public readings of books but it's only 15 EUR and the book has to be in copyright and be written by one of their member. (Source, in dutch [demorgen.be] .)

All of this is BS of course these people try to collect on EVERYTHING and as much as possible. They're regularly collecting money for artists that aren't affiliated with them and tend to go after "soft" targets that don't have resources to fight back. They're scum.

Most Appropriate Response (4, Funny)

Scarletdown (886459) | more than 2 years ago | (#39390569)

And Belgian librarians and the kids they read to all vehemently and with much venom curse... "Belgium!"

Re:Most Appropriate Response (1)

K. S. Kyosuke (729550) | more than 2 years ago | (#39390705)

And Belgian librarians and the kids they read to all vehemently and with much venom curse... "Belgium!"

Let's not call them anything, let's just ignore them.

Re:Most Appropriate Response (4, Funny)

jimmydevice (699057) | more than 2 years ago | (#39390709)

And with this action, the word "Belgium" starts it's declining status to the most vile curse word in the galaxy.

Re:Most Appropriate Response (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39390877)

Something the parents of the recently deceased 22 kids will really like you for!

Are they doing this on purpose? (5, Insightful)

CAPSLOCK2000 (27149) | more than 2 years ago | (#39390571)

I can't figure out if these people are stupid, incompetent or both. Is there any way in which they can make themselves seem any less sympathetic?

Re:Are they doing this on purpose? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39390633)

Is there any way in which they can make themselves seem any less sympathetic?

Pretty sure they don't care about that. Sympathy is generally overrated.

Re:Are they doing this on purpose? (4, Informative)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 2 years ago | (#39390639)

Its even stupider than that because (in addition to being wildly unsympathetic to just about any member of the public whose morality core hasn't been replaced by a board of directors) it appears to rest on the assumption that the demand for books is wholly inelastic and not at all governed by the production of new readers or competition from other sources of entertainment.

Sure, maybe sometime before the advent of radio it was a trivial competition between 'reading' and 'backbreaking domestic drudgery' for the home entertainment market; but that hasn't been true for a while...

Re:Are they doing this on purpose? (5, Insightful)

Wildclaw (15718) | more than 2 years ago | (#39390653)

There is a simpler answer. They are psychopaths the whole bunch of them and simply don't understand such concepts.

Re:Are they doing this on purpose? (2)

Omnifarious (11933) | more than 2 years ago | (#39390657)

Given that they're likely cooking their books to cover up bribery (RTA - all of it) I doubt they really care about seeming sympathetic. Bribe government officials to give them a club. Use club. Wash, rinse, repeat.

Re:Are they doing this on purpose? (4, Funny)

gman003 (1693318) | more than 2 years ago | (#39390671)

Is there any way in which they can make themselves seem any less sympathetic?

They could do exactly what they're doing, except while wearing Nazi uniforms and kicking puppies. Maybe run over some grandmothers on the way to the press conference.

Re:Are they doing this on purpose? (2)

NEDHead (1651195) | more than 2 years ago | (#39390737)

Who owns the 'SS' copyright?

Re:Are they doing this on purpose? (1)

jd2112 (1535857) | more than 2 years ago | (#39390775)

(trademark, not copyright) Chevrolet (high performance trim level on some models. Abbreviation for Super Sport)

Re:Are they doing this on purpose? (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39390729)

SABAM has a weight of legislation that gives it authority to do this. It is not doing this especially for the benefit of the creators of the works but because they are licensed to. They have no qualms taking a fee from gig's where the band plays all their own songs! The band, I can assure you never sees the royalty.

I understand that civil process takes a long time in Belgium. Not many people have the resources or patience to test them in a court of law. Hopefully idiotic activities like this report will continue until the weight of opinion swings so hard that a balance is finally brought...

Re:Are they doing this on purpose? (1)

rrohbeck (944847) | more than 2 years ago | (#39391231)

As long as they pay off the right politicians and get money out of it they probably don't care about sympathy.
I hope the public listens and asks candidates about their stance about copyright issues.

Reading is Fundamental (1)

Sulphur (1548251) | more than 2 years ago | (#39390583)

Does that include grannies teaching kids to read?

Re:Reading is Fundamental (1)

chilvence (1210312) | more than 2 years ago | (#39391269)

Actually, you owe your reading ability to the ancient Canaanites of the Middle east. You are backdated on royalty payments so I suggest you start coughing up like the rest of us law abiding citizens.

Not that big of a deal (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39390585)

Muslims want to fuck children in the ass and strap bombs on them in the name of some faggot god.

Re:Not that big of a deal (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39390615)

Actually, you raise an interesting point...

Re:Not that big of a deal (1)

Chrisq (894406) | more than 2 years ago | (#39390719)

Well - lets set the rights group on them, they are obviously reading the Qur'an to these kids.

Re:Not that big of a deal (1)

Salgak1 (20136) | more than 2 years ago | (#39390811)

Wouldn't work. It's even older than the Sonny Bono Act copyright extensions. . .

I'm okay with this (1)

CodeReign (2426810) | more than 2 years ago | (#39390609)

I'm okay with them cutting open the chicken that lays golden eggs. I mean reading has been decreasing over the past how many years. If they want to actively prevent an initiative to create readers, create their customers then fine. If they want some quick buck why not?

Excuse me? (1)

Linuxguy60 (1479695) | more than 2 years ago | (#39390623)

Umm.. whew, ahaa... wait could you repeat that please?

Waffles (1)

ThatsNotPudding (1045640) | more than 2 years ago | (#39390625)

Books about waffles will be exempt.
.
.
.
The Belgians love waffles!! -- John Oliver

Summary is incorrect (4, Informative)

it0 (567968) | more than 2 years ago | (#39390631)

Fascinating the greed that impacts simple people every day live and to to what use?

There is a communication on sabam's website to rectify the miscommunication that appeared in the media, they did not charge the library 250 euro, no it was only 239 euro's but for playing music in the library.

For a public reading they would collect 15 euro's per public reading if the work is protected and the rightsholder is represented by sabam.
Do not and did not collect this fee.

Re:Summary is incorrect (1)

Krokant (956646) | more than 2 years ago | (#39391063)

As usual, the only correct comment -- with the rectification (yes, you kids can all laugh now), is somewhere buried between the outrageous comments. Does anybody at slashdot even bother to do proper research before posting a week old news item?

Re:Summary is incorrect (5, Informative)

chichilalescu (1647065) | more than 2 years ago | (#39391291)

the summary is correct. SABAM clearly states that they want 15 euros per public reading (if the work is "protected"). and the GP knows this, still he acts as if this is perfectly normal. And, in the message by SABAM, they make it pretty obvious that they intend to ask for these +/- 15 euros whenever they can.
just check their webpage, in french or dutch, if you don't believe me (this incident is not mentioned on the english version).

Even better: it's a "misunderstanding" (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39390645)

SABAM (the group in question) said, in a response, that it was a misunderstanding [google.com] (translated, Dutch original [standaard.be] ). They charge 15 euro per public reading, and they cannot distinguish between adults and children. They always have to charge (their words, not mine).

For those of you wondering where the misunderstanding is: they invented a nice strawman for that, by saying that the library wasn't yet slapped with a yearly fee of about 250 euro. Which is true, that hadn't happened yet. But, from the sound of it, SABAM has every intention to do so.

Thankfully, this hasn't gone unnoticed. SABAM is losing favour with politicians [google.com] . Hopefully this storm will go somewhere. Note that SABAM isn't the only rightsholder club in Belgium (there apparently is some competition! yay free market!), so dissolving them ought to be an option.

Re:Even better: it's a "misunderstanding" (1)

RyuuzakiTetsuya (195424) | more than 2 years ago | (#39390697)

I don't care what the context is.

Maybe Belgian society is different and while I've been contrarian on IP rights here, this is unfuckingacceptable. Period. If they took that 15â cost, and then donated it back, maybe. If its due to some EU IP thing.

Otherwise SABAM should come out in public dressed up like a Tin tin villain.

They are horrible (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39390677)

As a belgian I can only confirm that they are the most horrible kind of "rightsholder group" you can imagine. Some of their "royalties" include. An extra tax on every dataholder (empty CD's, hard drive's, memory cards, ipods, etc...), local bands have to pay a fee when they perform even when they only perform their own songs (because they are influenced by ...), they collect fee's from doctors waiting rooms, pubs, private parties, buses, even on the work-floor when there is music playing, ...

Re:They are horrible (1)

NoNonAlphaCharsHere (2201864) | more than 2 years ago | (#39390715)

Is any of the above true? Can a non-AC Belgian confirm? This is mind-boggling. These assholes sound worse than the BSA - and I didn't think that was possible.

Re:They are horrible (3, Informative)

polar red (215081) | more than 2 years ago | (#39390757)

confirmed; sadly enough.

Re:They are horrible (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39390857)

Then you ain't seen what the RIAA, ASCAP, BMI, and SESAC are doing! (AKA The Music MAFIAA) They are pretty much the same, except for the reading in libraries part. I sure hope this doesn't give THEM any ideas???

Because it's for kids, because it's by volunteers. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39390689)

Copyright law enables the artists to fulfill his obligation to ensure a proper quality of a public presentation of his work and to protect his reputation.

Because it's volunteers and not professionals, they have to ask the author for permission to do this job.
Because it's for kids and their future, the job has to be done properly and not by just anyone who has the ability to assemble letters to a word and words to a sentence.

Re:Because it's for kids, because it's by voluntee (2)

chilvence (1210312) | more than 2 years ago | (#39390949)

If you have actually convinced yourself that, there is no redeeming you.

Seems reasonable given the law (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39390701)

If we ignore the biased framing in the summary and article and simply think about the situation for a moment, the conclusion can only be that the SABAM is basically right. The volunteers reading the books are basically spreading the copyrighted material and by law the rights holders have the exclusive right to do so. Remember that, in Europe, there is no such thing as fair use. Instead, why don't the libraries/volunteers simply license the work? For probably only a small fee there would be no legal threats and the right holders would get their fair share too.

Re:Seems reasonable given the law (1)

buybuydandavis (644487) | more than 2 years ago | (#39391017)

Within their legal rights does not equal right. That's the problem; the laws are wrong, not right.

I think most here are pissed about IP Laws in general, and this asshat application of them is another opportunity to fume and vent over it.

Yeah? So what! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39390725)

If the law allows it, I say go for it. If you don't like it, you know the routine.

Time for a visit to your proctologist, Doctor Ben Dover

They need to collect more! (3, Funny)

whoop (194) | more than 2 years ago | (#39390763)

This is piracy, plain and simple. The publishers are losing millions, if not billions, because each kid now won't need to buy the book themselves. They need to multiply the cost of the book by the number of kids being read to, and add a half dozen zeroes to the end for good measure.

Copyrights are to be taken very seriously, folks! This mass, rampant piracy needs to come to a close immediately so these poor, kind, destitute authors can get what is due to them.
 

Re:They need to collect more! (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39390837)

Millions? Billions? You are seriously underestimating this menace. Rights-holders need to charge on the order of trillions; 100 trillion might just be enough. Global Thermonuclear war is all that awaits if they don't get their money.

Recidivist... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39390765)

Volunteers. Who – again –

Sounds like repeat offenders to me. It's this sort of premeditated, repeated attack of the creative, content producing, hard working artist that must be stamped out. What sort of message does this send to our children. The pirating of quality childhood memories and education, with a know market value, debases the system as we have constructed it. It's the thin end of the wedge, leading to anarchy and communism. Won't any one think of our way of life, and the childen?

Pay em (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39390777)

The libraries should pay them. If its Belgian law, they should honor it. The fees incurred can be collected from the parents of the children getting read the books. If the parents don't want to pay, they can just not send their child to the library. All pretty simple, really.

If the parents don't like the above solution, well I guess they have the option to try and change Belgian copyright laws.

Any other action would be tantamount to anarchy.

Re:Pay em (1)

Stormwatch (703920) | more than 2 years ago | (#39390847)

Any other action would be tantamount to anarchy.

More and more I wonder if that's such a bad thing, really...

Re:Pay em (1)

king neckbeard (1801738) | more than 2 years ago | (#39391041)

If a law is stupid, it should not be obeyed. In fact, a law this dumb needs to be disobeyed. Belgians should take to the streets and read to groups of children in protest.

Re:Pay em (1)

buybuydandavis (644487) | more than 2 years ago | (#39391097)

The parents also have the option to ignore, subvert, and undermine the application of those laws.

And no, that isn't anarchy. People jaywalk all the time. Goverments, law, and order haven't ceased to exist because of it.

Those volunteers are stealing $150,000 per reading (1)

blanchae (965013) | more than 2 years ago | (#39390855)

Each one of those pirated book readings is costing $150,000 per child who attends. That must add up to $8 billion dollars in lost revenue per year. I'm surprised that the Belgium economy can survive. I suggest that we burn all the books to stop this insanity.

We should imprison people who talk (1)

gelfling (6534) | more than 2 years ago | (#39391019)

Or perhaps pull out their tongues. And don't forget to blind people who look at things.

I don't see the problem here (1)

glwtta (532858) | more than 2 years ago | (#39391029)

What, they shouldn't be charged just because they're kids? Kids get charged for movie tickets and DVDs, don't they? Sometimes at a discount, sometimes not, but that's up to the rightsholder.

If you believe that you can "own" information, this follows naturally.

Re:I don't see the problem here (1)

chilvence (1210312) | more than 2 years ago | (#39391179)

I would love to hear Roald Dahl's opinion on this. I believe it would be particularly succinct given the nature of all his stories [recap: wicked adults torment innocent children in various ways]. Too bad he is dead...

Guilt-free Piracy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39391035)

Every time I read a story like this, I feel a little less guilty about pirating the media that I do. The closest I come to paying for anything anymore is borrowing actual books from friends, or buying the occasional hardcover from authors I really like. I used to be a huge media consumer (I own hundreds of CDs, almost 1000 DVDs, etc) but since the companies started using these tactics and implementing crippling DRM on their media, I quit using it.

A week ago, I went to watch a DVD on my computer (anime TV series, ~20 discs in set). MPClassic could not play it properly, and WMP said I did not have rights to view the disc. So I torrented the whole series and watched that. Another nail in the coffin.

Now, I watch fansubbed anime. I read scanslated manga. I watch commercial-free torrented TV shows. I play pirated games on a pirates copy of Windows. I read borrowed books. I listen to radio, or 20-year old music I bought in college. Screw you media companies, you squandered any goodwill I had for you with years of trying to cheat me and other consumers. It's payback time, and we're raising an entire generation on file sharing.

Abolish copyright (1)

symbolset (646467) | more than 2 years ago | (#39391039)

Hi! Is it time to abolish copyright yet?

The Problem (4, Insightful)

no-body (127863) | more than 2 years ago | (#39391093)

with all those sensational messages is that the individuals making the decisions are unknown. It's an organization of some kind with some capital letters as abbreviated name.

Who are those persons?
Spokesperson - Jerome Van Win - http://www.facebook.com/jvanwin [facebook.com] ??

SABAM headquarters is located at 75-77 rue d'Arlon in Brussels

Christophe DEPRETER has been the Managing Director of SABAM since 1 July 2009.
http://www.sabam.be/en/sabam/management [sabam.be]
http://www.raaskalderij.be/2012/03/sabam-noemt-uitbreiding-activiteit-logische-stap/ [raaskalderij.be]

Carine Libert, Department of Legal Affairs and International Affairs http://www.facebook.com/people/Carine-Libert/100002967307348 [facebook.com]

Luc Van Oycke, Director of Administration and Finance http://kopimiuk.wordpress.com/tag/luc-van-oycke/ [wordpress.com]

Willy Heyns, Director of ICT http://www.facebook.com/people/Willy-Heyns/100000541173703 [facebook.com]

Jac Cuypers, COO http://www.facebook.com/jac.cuypers [facebook.com]

Serge Vloeberghs, Director of Sales http://www.facebook.com/people/Serge-Vloeberghs/1171478165 [facebook.com]

Sandrine Evenepoel, Director of Human Resources http://www.facebook.com/sandrine.evenepoel [facebook.com]

E-mail : contact@sabam.be - yaaawn!

Shame them!

technically correct, (1)

pbjones (315127) | more than 2 years ago | (#39391127)

it's technically correct, but who thought that anyone would push the point. It's a public performance, the author may be entitled to royalties, library or park bench or TV, that doesn't matter in the eyes of copy-write

Forget Copyright Altogether (1)

epp_b (944299) | more than 2 years ago | (#39391131)

Y'know, at some point, we're just going to have to say forget copyright altogether and go back to the simplicity of: you bought it and can do whatever the heck you want with it.

all the belgians I know ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39391251)

all the belgians I know are too smart to put up with this shit

Time for a new law (1)

Shavano (2541114) | more than 2 years ago | (#39391289)

The law needs to be modified so that COPYRIGHT only controls the RIGHT to COPY the copyrighted material.

Anything else you want to do with your LEGAL COPY of a copyrighted material should be unrestricted.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?