Copyright deal ... Personal, not for profit use

 In the first, an action of the government to affect its citizens rights 
in such a profound way, and yet be dealt with behind closed doors outside 
the scrutiny and critique of said citizens is appalling to say the least.  
I could hope a chapter from the history of open (libertas) software could 
able the government to understand how apt an open design process is to 
information sharing and development. But, precisely the opposite is their 
reason for the clock and dagger.
 This motion on their part is plain to their efforts to push forward a 
controlling, proprietary interest in how the information of its citizens 
is regarded.  Our freedoms are held subject to business interests which 
concede to a small minority.  I am afraid.  This, if not dealt with 
appropriately, will be a brick in the path towards 'virtual' sedition by 
any citizen, when and if the need arises, as deemed by said business 
interests.
 How can any citizen protect itself except by becoming more paranoid or 
totally unencumbered (everything completely in the open), both of which is 
no solution but a reaction to self preservation - liberty without 
privacy ... not liberty.
	
 If on the other hand, this is subjected to an open forum, or at the least 
formal critique, a consensus to maintain privacy and fair use, as well as 
protecting (within reason!) business interests, may be reached to benefit 
all its citizens and not limit reasonable freedoms and rights.
 The act of counterfeit relies on the ownership of rights on information 
or materials and how those rights of ownership are passed on to users.  
The use by others and  the right to copy by a select user, i.e. copyright, 
of 'owned' materials or information in the digital age is so garbled (Can 
I use it if I can't copy it?) that a myriad of 'use' licences are required 
to just conduct simple business.
 Personal, not for profit use should be a standard agreement and right.  
Furthermore, and this is important, this should apply no matter how the 
information or material is obtained - note, this about the 'use'! (this is 
the tough part, but if you think long and hard, any restriction to this 
will corrupt liberty and privacy).  The method of how it is obtained 
should be the only actionable restraint, thus governable.
 
 But take care and note, this core reasoning will be held far from the 
debate, where the intent is to put a stake in any and all 'use' cases, 
personal or otherwise.  And once this is so buried under phrase after 
phase of legislative BS, to back up and shovel out the stall to retrieve 
the basic concepts will need the dedicated lifetime of those willing to 
get covered in said BS.