Here are some comments on the Adelphi Charter, which I hope to work into an article. Please don't spread this draft around--please let me finish it.
The Adelphi charter opposes the worst abuses of copyright and patent law, but does not seem to take a position about the freedom to share, or the freedom to change software. So it is only partial opposition to those abuses.
The rules proposed in article 9 for judging proposed exclusive rights extensions are not bad rules (though one vital rule is missing: respect social solidarity and everyone's right to control the tools they use). However, recommending these rules won't necessarily change the situation much, because governments typically give them lip service already. The hard part is making governments apply these rules sincerely, rather than just pretend to do so.
Another unfortunate thing about the charter is its use of the term "intellectual property". That term is propaganda for those that the charter opposes; by using it, it works against its own aims.
Closer to home, I was hurt (though not surprised) to see that it refers to "open source" but not "free software". This is presented as an alternative "model", the way the open source movement presents it, rather than as a matter of respecting the users' rights.
The charter could well have a positive effect, because even such limited opposition to restrictive laws is more opposition than there was before. But we should support stronger and clearer forms of opposition.