In the year 567 the monk Finnian accused another monk, Columba, for without permission to have copied a hymn book he had made. The dispute was brought before King Diarmait who pronounced a sentence in the form of the statement: “To every cow her calf, and consequently to every book its copy”. This is probably the first certain evidence we have in Europe on copyright and copyright issues.
You can read more about the history and the "awkward" copyright here. (It is in Norwegian).
In the same way as with the monk Finnian we also have a right to protection against others using our texts, photos, music, sayings, etc. In addition to national legislation in this area, there are also international laws. Norway is party to the Berne Convention, and must follow a rising number of EU directives in the area. In addition we have the WIPO Treaty and the TRIPS Agreement. These international agreements and our commitments to them, means that we are obliged to give foreign authors the same protection we give our own national authors - and vice versa.
Today it is not so easy to know what to disclose. Many people think that as long it is published on the Internet it is OK to use it. But there is something called intellectual property and we all have to respect it. Today we talk most about sharing movies and music on the Internet. Some post movies and music so that others can download it on their own PC. But even a picture on Facebook or a blog that another individual has taken and shared with us is intellectual property and can`t be used by us without permission from that person.
To protect against someone else using your intellectual property can be made in four different ways, depending on what you want to protect:
If you are an intellectual property owner, you should protect your rights. If you are a user, you should respect them. It is just as wrong to steal intellectual property as it is to break into a home, steal a car, or rob a bank.
April 5th 2011 the Parliament in Norway decided that the EU`s Data Retention Directive should be implemented in Norway.The directive was adopted with 89 votes against 80 votes. The directive is scheduled to be introduced next year.
Data Retention Directive was adopted in the EU in 2006 and is scheduled to be implemented by all Member States and EEA countries.
Today our use of the telephone is saving. Telecom operators are saving our use because they need information for billing, and if we consumers need to complain. This information is provided access to the police if they need it. Now the data is stored because of us consumers, but when the Data Retention Directive will be in operation, the data will be saved for the sake of the police. The police want information to be stored for at least a year because it takes time to investigate cases and they are afraid that information will disappear. More traffic data than now will be stored and the storage time will be longer.
Data Retention Directive will give the state the opportunity to full listing of our communications. The directive said that information about our use of telephone, mobile and data will be stored for 6 months. In practice this means that Norway's telecommunications companies will have information about who you call, how long the conversation lasts, where you were when you called and who you send text messages and emails to. There will also be saved which technical equipment that is used, it will see the registration number of the mobile phone and registration number on the SIM-card.
Proponents of the Data Retention Directive believe our security is more important than the right to privacy. A lot of people believe this directive is essential to oppose crime that crosses borders. It can among other things be terrorism, threats against government officials and money laundering. The police say it will be one of the most important tools they have to investigate the crime. They also say that the directive does not have anything to say to us while we are not doing anything wrong. In addition, it can be used to oppose infringement on the Internet, including the proliferation of images and films depicting sexual abuse of children.
Opponents fear the misuse of information and that privacy is threatened. They believe that the fundamental question that must be asked is where the line should go for state control over law-abiding citizen's life. They mean that the directive will impair people's privacy in that many are traceable constantly. At the same time, they believe that people's rule of law is weakened by the fact that one can`t distinguish between innocent and suspects. The mean that we introduce a principle which everyone is guilty until proven otherwise. In the long term this will open for the police to get access to more and more data about us. Today the Internet is rife with recipes on how to hide our identity and avoid being tracked by police, so all the people who wants to hide can do it. This speaks agains the intention of the Data Retention Directive says opponents.
The government denies that the directive will lead to the interception of millions of people. They stresses that the content data will not be saved and that none will be listened by the directive.
The costs of implementing the Data Retention Directive is unknown. It has been estimated at a cost of approx. 250 million Norwegian kroner, while others have estimated that at least tenfold. Who should pay for this is also uncertain, but the probability that it is us as consumers who have to take the bill is very high. This means that there will be more expensive to use mobile phones and the Internet.
Here is a video about what EU discuss these days about the Date Retention Directive. It`s called "Declaration 29". In short, it`s about that in the future it will be saved what we are looking for on the Internett. (We call it google)
