Improve translation.

[text-free-culture-lessig.git] / freeculture.xml

diff --git a/freeculture.xml b/freeculture.xml
index 3ef5c142c5d0e50b0d3930e7e640daed103ae597..eae61d52e91d44c27d27b9be5cc17f2e5f32d4f5 100644 (file)
--- a/freeculture.xml
+++ b/freeculture.xml
@@ -966,7 +966,7 @@ this change, the war to rid the world of Internet <quote>pirates</quote> will al
 culture of values that have been integral to our tradition from the start.
 </para>
 <indexterm><primary>Constitution, U.S.</primary><secondary>First Amendment to</secondary></indexterm>
-<indexterm><primary>Copyright law</primary><secondary>as protection of creators</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>copyright law</primary><secondary>as protection of creators</secondary></indexterm>
 <indexterm><primary>First Amendment</primary></indexterm>
 <indexterm><primary>Netanel, Neil Weinstock</primary></indexterm>
 <para>
@@ -1131,7 +1131,7 @@ to which most of us remain oblivious.
 <title><quote>PIRACY</quote></title>
 <partintro>
 <!-- PAGE BREAK 30 -->
-<indexterm><primary>Copyright law</primary><secondary>English</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>copyright law</primary><secondary>English</secondary></indexterm>
 <indexterm id='idxmansfieldwilliammurraylord' class='startofrange'><primary>Mansfield, William Murray, Lord</primary></indexterm>
 <indexterm><primary>music publishing</primary></indexterm>
 <indexterm><primary>sheet music</primary></indexterm>
@@ -2123,6 +2123,8 @@ and noticing split infinitives are the things that <quote>literate</quote> peopl
 about.
 </para>
 <indexterm><primary>advertising</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>commercials</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>television</primary><secondary>advertising on</secondary></indexterm>
 <para>
 Maybe. But in a world where children see on average 390 hours of
 television commercials per year, or between 20,000 and 45,000 
@@ -2148,6 +2150,7 @@ how difficult media is. Or more fundamentally, few of us have a sense
 of how media works, how it holds an audience or leads it through a
 story, how it triggers emotion or builds suspense.
 </para>
+<indexterm startref='idxcameratechnology3' class='endofrange'/>
 <para>
 It took filmmaking a generation before it could do these things well.
 But even then, the knowledge was in the filming, not in writing about
@@ -3105,6 +3108,7 @@ Edison's creative property.
 </section>
 <section id="recordedmusic">
 <title>Recorded Music</title>
+<indexterm id='idxcopyrightlawonmusicrecordings' class='startofrange'><primary>copyright law</primary><secondary>on music recordings</secondary></indexterm>
 <para>
 The record industry was born of another kind of piracy, though to see
 how requires a bit of detail about the way the law regulates music.
@@ -3241,6 +3245,7 @@ Copyright Act in 1909, record companies were free to distribute copies
 of recordings so long as they paid the composer (or copyright holder)
 the fee set by the statute.
 </para>
+<indexterm><primary>Grisham, John</primary></indexterm>
 <para>
 This is an exception within the law of copyright. When John Grisham
 writes a novel, a publisher is free to publish that novel only if
@@ -3249,8 +3254,8 @@ charge whatever he wants for that permission. The price to publish
 Grisham is thus set by Grisham, and copyright law ordinarily says you
 have no permission to use Grisham's work except with permission of
 Grisham.
-<indexterm><primary>Grisham, John</primary></indexterm>
 </para>
+<indexterm startref='idxcopyrightlawonmusicrecordings' class='endofrange'/>
 <para>
 But the law governing recordings gives recording artists less. And
 thus, in effect, the law <emphasis>subsidizes</emphasis> the recording
@@ -4246,6 +4251,17 @@ legitimate rights of creators while protecting innovation. Sometimes
 this has meant more rights for creators. Sometimes less.
 </para>
 <indexterm><primary>artists</primary><secondary>recording industry payments to</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>composers, copyright protections of</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxcongressusoncopyrightlaws2' class='startofrange'><primary>Congress, U.S.</primary><secondary>on copyright laws</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxcongressusonrecordingindustry2' class='startofrange'><primary>Congress, U.S.</primary><secondary>on recording industry</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxcopyrightlawonmusicrecordings2' class='startofrange'><primary>copyright law</primary><secondary>on music recordings</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm id='idxcopyrightlawstatutorylicensesin2' class='startofrange'><primary>copyright law</primary><secondary>statutory licenses in</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>radio</primary><secondary>music recordings played on</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>recording industry</primary><secondary>artist remuneration in</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>recording industry</primary><secondary>copyright protections in</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>recording industry</primary><secondary>radio broadcast and</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>statutory licenses</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>composer's rights vs. producers' rights in</primary></indexterm>
 <para>
 So, as we've seen, when <quote>mechanical reproduction</quote> threatened the
 interests of composers, Congress balanced the rights of composers
@@ -4267,6 +4283,7 @@ compensation, but at a level set by the law. It likewise gave cable
 companies the right to the content, so long as they paid the statutory
 price.
 </para>
+<indexterm startref='idxcongressusonrecordingindustry2' class='endofrange'/>
 <para>
 
 <!-- PAGE BREAK 88 -->
@@ -4285,6 +4302,8 @@ Congress chose a path that would assure
 <emphasis>compensation</emphasis> without giving the past
 (broadcasters) control over the future (cable).
 </para>
+<indexterm startref='idxcopyrightlawonmusicrecordings2' class='endofrange'/>
+<indexterm startref='idxcopyrightlawstatutorylicensesin2' class='endofrange'/>
 <indexterm startref='idxcabletv2' class='endofrange'/>
 <indexterm><primary>Betamax</primary></indexterm>
 <indexterm id='idxcassettevcrs1' class='startofrange'><primary>cassette recording</primary><secondary>VCRs</secondary></indexterm>
@@ -4301,6 +4320,7 @@ and shows. Sony was therefore benefiting from the copyright
 infringement of its customers. It should therefore, Disney and
 Universal claimed, be partially liable for that infringement.
 </para>
+<indexterm startref='idxcongressusoncopyrightlaws2' class='endofrange'/>
 <para>
 There was something to Disney's and Universal's claim. Sony did
 decide to design its machine to make it very simple to record television
@@ -10653,6 +10673,7 @@ social causes. But with the Internet, it includes a wide range of
 individuals and groups dedicated to spreading culture
 generally.<footnote><para>
 <!-- f1. -->
+<indexterm><primary>pornography</primary></indexterm>
 There's a parallel here with pornography that is a bit hard to
 describe, but it's a strong one. One phenomenon that the Internet
 created was a world of noncommercial pornographers&mdash;people who
@@ -11637,6 +11658,8 @@ who had advised us early on about a First Amendment strategy; and
 finally, former solicitor general Charles Fried.
 </para>
 <indexterm><primary>Fried, Charles</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Congress, U.S.</primary><secondary>constitutional powers of</secondary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Constitution, U.S.</primary><secondary>Commerce Clause of</secondary></indexterm>
 <para>
 Fried was a special victory for our side. Every other former solicitor
 general was hired by the other side to defend Congress's power to give
@@ -11666,6 +11689,8 @@ continue to have the right to control who did what with content they
 wanted to control.
 </para>
 <indexterm><primary>Gershwin, George</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>Porgy and Bess</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>pornography</primary></indexterm>
 <para>
 Dr. Seuss's representatives, for example, argued that it was
 better for the Dr. Seuss estate to control what happened to
@@ -13021,6 +13046,7 @@ perspectives.  And WIPO was an ideal venue for this discussion, since
 WIPO is the preeminent international body dealing with intellectual
 property issues.
 </para>
+<indexterm id='idxworldsummitontheinformationsocietywsis' class='startofrange'><primary>World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS)</primary></indexterm>
 <para>
 Indeed, I was once publicly scolded for not recognizing this fact
 about WIPO. In February 2003, I delivered a keynote address to a
@@ -13051,6 +13077,7 @@ had thought it was taken for granted that WIPO could and should. And
 thus the meeting about <quote>open and collaborative projects to create
 public goods</quote> seemed perfectly appropriate within the WIPO agenda.
 </para>
+<indexterm startref='idxworldsummitontheinformationsocietywsis' class='endofrange'/>
 <indexterm><primary>Apple Corporation</primary></indexterm>
 <para>
 But there is one project within that list that is highly
@@ -13165,7 +13192,10 @@ in understanding&mdash;the sort of mistake that is excusable in a
 first-year law student, but an embarrassment from a high government
 official dealing with intellectual property issues.
 </para>
+<indexterm><primary>World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS)</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>drugs</primary><secondary>pharmaceutical</secondary></indexterm>
 <indexterm><primary>generic drugs</primary></indexterm>
+<indexterm><primary>patents</primary><secondary>on pharmaceuticals</secondary></indexterm>
 <para>
 Second, who ever said that WIPO's exclusive aim was to <quote>promote</quote>
 intellectual property maximally? As I had been scolded at the