Slashdot Mirror
DeCSS, From the Beginning
An anonymous reader sent in a link to a presentation given by Tom Vogt at HAL 2001. He reviews the whole CSS/DeCSS mess from the beginning, which makes a it a nice backgrounder for people who are wondering what the Sklyarov, 2600 and other cases are all about.
Sadly this story does not get the attention in the media that it really should. Yes there are a few blurs about 'Fair Use' here and there, but nothing that really that is open in the public forum. The only problem is that this is not some simple story, it's a rather hard and complex issue, one that the avg. American wouldn't know about or really give a fuck about. Public apathy will doom us in the end.
Frankly if Sony and Paramount, etc. want to encrypt their media offerings then the should be forced to give a copy of the decrypting key to the Lirbary of Congress to held in escrow. The day that the copyright ends, those keys become public domain. End of story. No endless extentions to the life of the copyright either.
I also feel that copyright should move to be more like patents, 20 years to explot, then 'The End', public domain.
III.IIVIVIXIIVIVIIIVVIIIIXVIIIXIIIIIIIIVIIIIVVIII
What happened to 2600's appeal of the court decision about DeCSS? Last time I heard from it, the judge had asked some questions about different forms of free speech, which they answered a long time ago.. and then, no news at all, not on slashdot and not on 2600.com..
Did all media totally lost interest in the case and forgot mentionning the outcome? Or is it really taking so long for the judge to decide?
They have one. It's called a lockpick, and it's perfectly legal. Locksmith's use them all the time. And it's also perfectly legal for you to pick the lock on your own car or house if (say) you locked the keys inside.
I'm not saying that the above is practical. I simply lack the knowledge to know why the above might be impractical. Any enlightenment on the issue would help me greatly. Because, if there are legal reasons why they can create CSS breakers and I can't, I'm getting the scary feeling that I'm also not legally allowed to know what those reasons are (NDA's and such). What I guess I'm really failing to grasp is how the movie industry major players can have this kind of control without being considered a Cartel. And aren't cartels illegal in the United States? Can anyone alleviate my confusion?
It's high time for a raining storm of fire and brimstone to cut down corporate lawyers a few notches. Their IP content just isn't in need of that much protection. And penalties for violations cannot justifiably be greater than those for rape, second degree murder, etc.
Why should copying a CD for someone other than yourself receive any greater penalty than stealing that CD from a store?
Copying for other than personal use is petty theft at best. AT BEST. I say that because in rality, it's LESS harmful than petty theft because the copying does not deprive anyone else, NOT ANYONE ELSE, of their copy of whatever. How can it be "theft" if nothing is missing? Yes, I'm trotting out the movie theater example. Unsold emtpy seats in a movie theater are not called losses or criminal theft. Yet if some kids sneak into those seats and watch the movie, a loss is declared of n kids * full fare ticket dollars? "Oh but what if kids sneaking in fill seats so paying customers can't find a seat". Well, if I make 50,000,000,000 copies of Win XP CDs, that doesn't block you from buying one, does it? Next question please?
Note also that Microsoft does not report even one bleeping cent in lost revenue to piracy on their annual shareholders report. NT ONE CENT! Um, doesn't the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) require full disclosure of all profits, losses, expenses, etc. in that report? Don't people go to jail for long periods of time if they fudge numbers on this report? Not one cent reported lost to piracy.
I guess piracy is a "loss" everywhere except where it counts, on financial reports, on tax documents, on investment prospectus, on insurance claims covering loss, etc.
So do I think piracy is wrong? Yes! I do! I just think it's "seriousness" is way too exaggerated. And it becomes a more evil crime with harsher penalties every year to the point where it belittles the seriousness of other more real crimes. Beat up and fuck your unconscious girlfriend? Get a three day trial, zero dollar fine, three years in jail, and be able to go out with women again once you're out. Crack copy protection schemes? Get a 3 YEAR trial, a 5,000,000 dollar fine and 10 years in jail, and a ban from ever touching or getting near a computer ever again.
Piracy: Bad, but not that bad.
OK, we have DeCSS... do we have code that actually ENCRYPTS stuff with CSS? What if people widely started encrypting their own works with CSS, (not as secure encryption, just as slightly-better-than-ROT13) then there would be an obvious reason to have it.
Could decrypting your own work actually be illegal?
sig fault
Upon reading of the 100+ page license for CSS, I had a thought- DMCA isn't protecting the encryption; it's protecting the license for CSS. Wrap a weak encryption around a product, and only allow legal decryption if you agree to an onerous license. It doesn't matter how weak the encryption is, that's not the point. The point is to force agreement to the terms of the license. This seems to have legal ramifications, since if the purpose of the encryption is not to encrypt, but to activate the DMCA and thereby force the licensing terms, then it's not really encryption; it's a licensing ploy. So perchance then it doesn't fall under DMCA anymore, since the intention of the scheme isn't really encryption but licensing?
Curtains for windows?
Try some other programs - I also have not had luck with Xine.
There is the Linux Video Project which produces a DVD player for linux.
There is MPlayer which is capable of playing DVD's...
But the one that I have had the most success with is the VideoLan Client. Despite the name, it is essentially a DVD player for many OS'es, with a built-in CSS decryptor. I have used it very successfully.
While at work, I took it upon myself to educate some fellow employees about what's going on in the DeCSS / Dmitry case, etc. While talking to someone who I thought was one of the most intelligent people I worked with, I explained the case, and he thought 2600, Dmitry were wrong. I proceeded to use the example: "If I broke Windows 2000 Password Encription, and I told the world about it, should I go to jail", his answer was 'yes'. I told him that I was protected under freespeech. At that point he told me that the conversation was over. He turned to another worked and said '..to be young again'. For the record, he's 33, and I'm 19. My basic concern is: how old are the people who are fighting this now, and will they still feel the same at age 33? Later he told me that he used to feel the same way, however that's not how the world works.
One line of questions I'd like to see MPAA answer would be:
1) Do they believe in the fair use rights for consumers?
2) Do they believe in the right for anyone to reverse engineer any technology.
If yes, that would imply that any user or group of users would be allowed to playback any DVD's in any ways they (the consumer) see fit?
How would MPAA suggest a consumer to exercise their rights to create a tool to playback a DVD without infringing on the DMCA?
And how would said tool not end up being a tool for copying as well?
I have looked for this information as well, and while I expect it is available online somewhere, it is not easily located. I searched the the EFF site, but the voting records are either not there or not easily found. Perhaps this is not surprising, since the EFF is a lobbying organization that needs to maintain good relations with the congressmembers and their staff in order to remain effective. What is needed is a more radical branch of the digital free speech movement that identifies and campaigns for sympathetic congressman and congressional candidates, and also actively campaigns against politicans who have shown themselves to be the lackeys and prostitutes of industry.
Slashdot, while a great resource for staying informed, is not a very useful organizing tool. What is needed is an online organizing resource that is more politically active and more radicalized than EFF, a supplement to the EFF modeled along the lines of Sinn Fein vs. IRA militants. Sladly, Slashdot is not sufficient, as we all too quickly move on to the new cool toy/outrage du jour.