Slashdot Mirror
Industry Divided Over SSSCA
CBravo writes: "The EE Times has a story that talks about the SSSCA and how it divides the industry. Short part:'If approved, the law would be enforceable under federal regulations and could dramatically alter the way system OEMs design and develop PCs, TVs, set-tops or other digital appliances with embedded microprocessors, according to industry sources familiar with the Hollings proposal. The motion-picture industry, with the Disney and Fox studios in the lead, backs the legislation.'" If you thought the DMCA was bad, look out -- the SSSCA would inject far more control into a wide range of electronic devices.
Would this make Linux, et al, illegal, too?
Those who sacrifice security to condemn liberty deserve to repeat history or something. - Benjamin Santayana
OEMs of PCs will be forced to install Windows because Windows Media Player will be one of the few players with support from motion-picture industry due to its built-in "copy-protection" mechanisms. Linux will be BANNED from OEMs or face lawsuits for circumventing copyright. Or did I miss the real implications of this bill?
¦ ©® ±
If this passes, we can all kiss Linux goodbye. I have already written all my Reps in Congress, the Senate and Fritz Hollings who is the writer of this bill, expressing my displeasure at this new assault on my Fair Use Rights. I don't think it will do any good, considering the Justice Dept now catagorizes Hackers as a Terrorist Threat.
"Our products just aren't engineered for security,"
-Brian Valentine,VP in charge of MS Windows Development
This legislation would make:
a) Building your own computer from commodity parts illegal.
b) Building your own OS illegal.
c) Programming your computer/hardware illegal unless: you only use the officially accepted libraries and agree not to even attempt reverse engineering any of them.
Welcome to your nightmare. This is what the Sony executive said a couple of years ago when he said that they'll be taking the battle for their IP rights to every home and every computer.
I understand the issues of building copy controls into hardware. Unfortunately my friends and family do not. Is it possible to explain this to someone in a non alarmist manner (not the MS/the Govt will control all your data)? The only way I can think to explain it is by giving an overview of low level languages, current copy protection schemes, etc.
How do you explain this to your Mom?
http://www.petitiononline.com/SSSCA/petition.html is just one.
(20..19..18..17...)
Why is it that many people who claim to support standards have such atrocious spelling and grammar?
There's no reason to freak out about all this. Take off the foil hat and think reasonable-like for a minute. The SSSCA is *not* a law. It is a proposal put forth by a single (miguided) lawmaker. Literally *thousands* of worthless/unconstitutional legislation are proposed by congress every year. The vast majority of the time, the checks-n-balances system of our government keeps these proposals from getting put into the books. The system does work, and this piece of crap will end up getting thrown out just like all the other junk legislation.
If you don't like the proposal, write your representative. Tell them how stupid and unconstitutional this is. Don't complain about how "The Man" is out to strip you of your rights. That won't accomplish anything.
-atrowe: Card-carrying Mensa member. I have no toleranse for stupidity.
I thought that the Social Security administration was going to be starting up a certificate authority until I read the article there... seems much less ominous sounding now.
This battle might actually be interesting. Which industry has the best most influence on .us politicians?
It looks like Hollywood contributes more to the coffers of the political parties.
Let's just hope the Electronics Industry and Comsumers win this one.
/Styx
That's funny. Now, I could have sworn that the internet came to be the world-altering sucess it is today due to open standards and a lack of control. But hey, who knows, maybe I just need to go take my soma and follow the MPAA/RIAA party line? yeah.
- Cheers,
- RLJ
If there's one thing we've learned this past month, it's that we must stick together. As computer users, we must stand together on this issue. This includes writing your state representatives in the U.S. Congress and Senate, since they will ultimately be deciding the fate of this bill.
Write Your Representative
Write Your Senator
Keep our rights alive!
also, visit #gift on irc.openprojects.net for even more info
2. Support this legislation and await its passage.
3. Rake in the money selling "r@r3 pre-ban computers with CD-R drives" on eBay based on the grandfathering in section 101.
4. (optional) Spend the money you made to vacation somewhere and reminisce about the day when information wanted to be free.
"This is the best way to protect America's valuable creative works, which in turn will expand broadband access and Internet use," said Jack Valenti, president of the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA).
Such as 'Driven,' 'Spy Kids,' or any of the other facile, intellectually insulting drivel these people put out on a predictable basis? Seeing this constant stream of unadulterated crap described as "valuable creative work" makes me almost as nauseous as watching the stuff in the first place!
Flamer Disclaimer: Yes, yes, yes. I know I don't have to watch it. Easy, cheap date for the wife/kids, though.
Karma: Professionally Doomed (mostly affected by inability to keep opinions to self)
Explain it to your mom the same way you explained the chilling implications of the DMCA.
And unfortunately, you can expect to be just as effective in getting her excited about stopping the bill.
This is scary as hell - because these initiatives are difficult to explain to consumers, it may be impossible to stop them. Voter apathy has never had such potential to rot the country from the inside out. Soon, any business big enough to afford a good lobbyist can expect to have their business plan protected by law.
Since it appears I don't have much power to do anything else about it. It may come to the point where I don't buy any new electronic gadgets at all. I think this is something that each of us will have to consider in the coming years as the media companies try to mold technologies using the legal system.
I've began to draw lines in the sand. I will not buy from a website that requires you use Microsoft Passport. I will not buy copy protected CD's, and if I discover one I buy to be copy protected, I will return it. I will not buy an e-book. I will not use a media format that requires a special proprietary player. This isn't a boycott, this is simply a moral decision on my own part. I would have been the most likely person to buy these things, but not under these terms.
OK, the bill and all the other hype specifies a "digital device". So why doesn't someone just design some sort of "interface" that connects to the digital source and simply converts the digital signal to some (probably yet-to-be-invented) "high-speed" analog signal. This analog signal then would be input to the DVR or set-top box, and converted back to digital. The conversion would just have to be fast enough to "keep up" with the digital speed.
That way, the input to PVR or set-top box would be analog thus exempting it from the legislation.
Whatcha think?
My mom always said, "Jim, you're 1 in a million." Given the current population, there are 7000 of me. God help us all!
Bruce Schneier (of Counterpane) does a good job of sticking up for our rights on this one. He's really been doing a good job of getting the message out. Most articles on this kind of stuff have some good quotes from him. He's a consistent voice of reason. Kudos, Bruce.
"I don't know half of you half as well as I should like, and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve."
Having the consumer electronics folks against this is good, since they have a well-funded lobby (though it may not be as influential as the MPAA). That's what will slow down this kind of bad legislation. The best way to keep the consumer electronics folks on the right side of this is consumer education: if we geeks can inform the masses about content controls and convince them that they should avoid devices that contain them it could stiffen the consumer electronics manufacturers resistance. DVD enthusiasts made Divx smell like dogsh*t to the masses and prevented it from being widely adopted. But the manufacturers will only resists content controls for as long as they think it will cost them money.
Lemme get this straight - locking down all consumer hardware, banning the PC, and doing it all to prevent people from getting any use out of P2P networks for file-sharing.
So - in order to "expand broadband access", we not only kill Napster (which was arguably the "killer app" that drove people to demand broadband access at home) - we also now want to kill the PCs on which any application can run.
Well, I suppose if nobody uses broadband for themselves, that leaves more dark fiber available to Hollyweird.
But it smacks a little too much of "we had to destroy the village to save it" for my tastes.
(Of course, we all know this is exactly what Jack wants. To which I say "Fuck you, Jack. Fuck you with a wire brush. You and your partner in oligopoly, Ms. Rosen, are cordially invited to tongue my hot sweaty bag.")
I was half-joking when I suggested scouring the surplus shops for spare PCs to last us through the coming Dark Ages. I'm no longer joking. If your "new PC" budget is $2000, don't buy a $2000 PC. Buy four $500 PCs - with non-CPRM hard drives, flashable-firmware DVD-ROMs, and CD/RWs. Because the hardware you buy over the next 2 years may very well have to last you the rest of your life.
Fuck you, Jack.
"unlawful to manufacture, import, offer to the public, provide or otherwise traffic in any interactive digital device that does not include and utilize certified security technologies that adhere to the security system standards."
Don't we have freedom to choose what goes into the products we make?
Bill of Rights, Amendment 14:
"nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
I'm not sure this would stand up in a court of law.
I first read about this on Wired on September 7th. It seemed really extreme at the time, but after the attack it seems a little less extreme, and that is were the danger is.
Hey kids - you know that stealing and breaking the law is a bad thing? I thought you did. So, here's how you can do the right thing and win a prize. If you tell M*ck*y what movies, music, or game your parents have copied, we'll send you a prize!
Hehehehe...
I donate all spillover Karma to the charity of my choice... Ada was still a babe despite what people may say...
Remember:
Don't ask, don't tell.
I'm not afraid of falling, it's the sudden stop at the end that frightens me.
I intend to write to my Congressional representatives and educate them on the perils of SSSCA, including my plan to boycott all SSSCA-compliant devices (should anyone be dumb enough to manufacture them). They need to be aware that this is not something that will be cheerfully accepted.
Assuming plan A fails and the special interests get their wish, we have to ensure that the SSSCA-compliant devices sit on store shelves, as space-wasters. If we aren't willing to resist the implementation of this stuff, then we deserve the end results.
If anyone has a better idea on defeating SSSCA, let's hear about it.
Hmmm, I wonder if those rumors I heard about the SSSCA virus are true?
The main effect of this is how it would stifle innovation and growth in the industry. If OEMs have to comply with a strict standard, there will be little deviation from it and little difference in price/features in the industry. Strict voluntary standards are good to a point, but the way this sounds is the government will basically tell companies what chipset features they can use. Not a good thing.
We need to take a lesson from other groups. If techies could somehow form an organization to strongly oppose such legislation in the same manner as the NRA prevents gun legislation, these bills would never get off the ground. It's time to organize and take it on the offensive!
Cryptome.org has the full text of the bill here. Check it out.
> I bet special forces already have bin Laden and he's squealin like a baby...
He's giggling and laughing from being tickled and kissed? They really ought to get tougher special forces then.
- For the complete works of Shakespeare: cat
-atrowe: Card-carrying Mensa member. I have no toleranse for stupidity.
Dude I think you mis-spelled tolerance...
As well as undermining the credibility of Mensa...
*** Where are we going? And what's with this handbasket?
Wheee!!!
"selling old VCR's..."
shouldn't that read "trafficking media copyright circumvention devices" ?
*grin*
A year spent in artificial intelligence is enough to make one believe in God.
i've all but given up on tv (must have "good eats", "battlebots" and "the daily show")...i haven't been to a movie that didn't make me feel like i was "goat-sexed" at the box office in YEARS...even music has largely forsaken me.
i read more than ever (god, i LOVE being pretentious!) and i guess i spend more time with my computer than any other "entertainment" device. but i don't watch movies on it or listen to illegally ripped mp3s. i actually use it as a tool for creating my own music.
now, don't get me wrong, i've written to my reps, called their offices, faxed them, etc. i just feel drained. i want it all to stop. yeah, i'm a whiner. anyone wanna toss me a bone with a "me too!" post? damn i hate mondays...
hmmm...
If this ridiculous piece of legislation is passed, it could being to erode the US's competitiveness on the world market. Here in Britain, we will be able to continue to run Linux and 'non-approved' devices such as (gasp) PCs which we have built ourselves, which will make things much easier for businesses (and consumers) than it would be over there. If such a law was passed here, no one would take much notice anyway. We've got bigger problem at the moment (eg stopping an attack on the Square Mile).
Haven't your maggots (er, politicians) got bigger things on their plate too?
SpamNet - a spam blocker that really works
They should just go ahead and pass the law they *really* are trying to get at, instead of pussyfooting around it:
Anyone can be arrested for any reason, and detained for however long the 'authorities' deem appropriate.
Problem solved- it's the only law we'd need.
-J5K
The libertarian solution to the failures of capitalism is to apply more capitalism til the failures are fixed.
Heh... thanks for making me laugh.
That's a nice Slashdotism.
I used to LOVE opening up broken electronic stuff and trying to understand how it worked when I was a kid...
will the laws include provisions for lesser jail sentences for minors who "attempt to circumvent copyright-enforcing hardware for media playback"?
A year spent in artificial intelligence is enough to make one believe in God.
Don't let free software get destroyed by this clause, which seems obviously bought and paid for by Microsoft!
Right. But in a wag-the-dog scenario, the entertainment industry (with huge lobbying budgets and relatively modest economic significance) is pushing through laws that will have huge effects on telecom, consumer electronics and high tech (with relatively modest lobbying budgets and massive economic significance).
The best we can hope for is an upswing in lobbying efforts by high-tech organizations. That *might* counter this bill, but just means more lobbying by groups defending their business.
What is really required is a massive, permanent lobbying effort by EFF and other civil rights organizations. Too bad it'll never be within their financial reach.
Has it been introduced to the Senate yet? And if so, what's the bill number? Useful information to have when bitching to your Senators.
How do you explain this to your Mom?
Hi, mom.
Congress is considering a law that will make copying anything illegal. Taping shows from TV, copying songs to your Sony Minidisc, burning CDs, making backups of software, moving eBooks from your PC to your PDA, and a whole lot more won't be illegal but will be impossible because all computers and devices that will be made once the law is passed will explicitly ban it. Welcome to my nightmare.
I think the signature is supposed to be ironic. You know, incorrectly spelling a word while saying that you belong to a society of overly intelligent people?
And chill out. There's enough tension and hatred in the world without being mad at every person belonging to something like Mensa. I doubt all the people in that organization are "pathetic." It's like saying that people in a charitable organization are pathetic because they are enjoying the company of other like-minded people; I don't see the correlation.
Also, if you're going to accuse someone of being pathetic and requiring validation, you might want to consider not appearing pompous in your sig; he managed to get his point across without using slang or vulgarity. For someone supposedly so intelligent, you might want to look up "irony." It's under "I" in the dictionary.
"He may look like an idiot, and talk like an idiot, but don't let that fool you. He really is an idiot." - Duck Soup
I posted the following comment to Slashdot and another site not so long ago, unaware of this new proposed legislation.
It's similar in approach to what is being suggested:
Here's my comment
I hate it when an ironic posting starts to come true: especially so soon!
Is it just me or is the US leading the world into the technolgy dark ages?
- It represents a serious threat to the national security and the
well-being of the United States;
- Its provisions are outrageously un-Constitutional;
- It represents poor public policy, advancing a narrow corporate
interest against the interests of the public at large; and
- It is (deliberately) over-broad and unconscionably vague in its
provisions, particularly as regards its definition of "digital device".
These points, as well as changes I think are needed in current copyright law, are more fully discussed below A. Introduction.The Constitution requires that copyright term be limited. From this point of view, the current copyright law is no less than a Constitutional outrage. Triply so: From a theoretical point of view, if Congress is free retroactively to extend copyright term at will (as it has repeatedly done in this century), then copyright term fails to fit the definition of "limited". From an operational point of view, a copyright law that has been repeatedly extended so that no works have actually made it or will make it into the public domain during my entire adult lifetime, both past and future, is a copyright law that fails the operational definition of "limited". And finally, in human terms, a copyright term that extends more than a lifetime after the death of the author fails the definition of "limited" on the human scale. It has been argued that this extension of copyright encourages authorship. Such an argument is purely specious: it is impossible that an author already 50 years dead can be encouraged to produce further works by the extension of his copyrights for another twenty years.
B. Discussion1 034). A year ago,
the US National Security Agency concluded that it was impossible to
make Microsoft systems sufficiently secure for sensitive applications,
and constructed an especially secure configuration of the Linux
operating system for that purpose (see http://www.nsa.gov/selinux/).
The SSSCA would make Apache and Linux illegal.
1. National Security: First of all, this bill is a serious threat to the national security of the United States. The reason for this is as follows: Both the Internet and digital computers have become critical to the continued security and prosperity of the United States. This bill, by outlawing all digital equipment that does not " include and utilize certified security technologies" would have the de facto effect of outlawing all software and computers except those from a few large corporate sources--particularly, the effect of outlawing so-called "Open Source" software such as the Linux operating system and the Apache web-server, which are distributed in human readable and modifiable form. What would remain is exactly the systems and software which have shown themselves most vulnerable to attack: virtually all of the disruptive "virus" and "worm" attacks of the last five years have been made possible by defects in the inherent design of Microsoft operating system, server, and email and application software. The computer-security situation is so serious that earlier this week the very staid Gartner Group management consulting firm issued a warning recommending that their clients immediately remove Microsoft internet server software and replace it with products from other vendors such as Apache and IPlanet (see http://www3.gartner.com/DisplayDocument?doc_cd=10
2. Un-Constitutionality: The SSSCA, with its absolutist protection for "security technologies" is an affront to the Constitutional provision for copyright. The Constitution grants Congress the power to establish a LIMITED monopoly,
against whose conditions the SSSCA is an outrage. The SSSCA admits no limit on the term of protection it espouses. Nor does it make any provision for fair use. In its original 1823 decision establishing the doctrine of fair use, the Supreme Court stated that Congress may make no copyright law so strict as to deny freedom of speech nor freedom of the Press. The SSSCA violates this Constitutional requirement also.3. Poor public Policy: The Founding Fathers did not regard "intellectual property" as a natural right, but rather as a limited legislated monopoly which was of benefit to society as a whole _if managed properly_. They had had relatively recent experiences with both no-copyright situations and with permanent Crown monopolies on publishing (and, sadly, they tended to be better versed in history than many are today.) They knew that copyright was of greatest benefit to society at large if it offered a quid pro quo: in exchange for a temporary monopoly on copying, the authors must pass their works into the public domain--the property of all of us--at the expiration of the limited term. This bargain has already been brought to the breaking point by current copyright law,e specially the DMCA; the SSSCA breaks it completely. It is purely and specifically for the narrow benefit of a few large publishing houses who fear that digital technology will break both their stranglehold on the authors and music-writers and their captivation of the public at large. (Note that the SSSCA's provision for setting "standards" has the effect of freezing out both writers and the general public.)
4. Over-breadth and Vagueness: Finally, Sen. Hollings himself has admitted in interviews with Wired magazine that the provisions are deliberately vague, in order to get a bill passed with provisions that may be applied far more broadly than Congress intends or believes reasonable. Congress should not permit itself to be so deceived.
C. Needed Copyright Reforms.
There are reforms that do need to be made in copyright law; let me suggest that any copyright bill should be amended to include at least the following:
D. Conclusion
You have sworn to uphold the Constitution of the United States. Copyright law should be returned to its Constitutional limits.
"My opinions are my own, and I've got *lots* of them!"
I'd watch it.
atrowe: Card-carrying Mensa member. I have no toleranse for stupidity.
This has been bugging me for a while. Just thought you should know.
You could show people RMS's story The Right to Read. It doesn't specifically relate to hardware-controlling laws though.
-- Ed Avis ed@membled.com
I don't see how you can put this without it sounding a little alarmist. Disney wants you to purchase a new TV, DVD, VCR/TiVo and cable decoder... that they will then control.
Every time you place a DVD or VCR that you own or have rented in the devices that you bought, Disney will decide whether you are allowed to watch it, and how many times. Disney will decide whether you may tape shows to watch later, and how many times you can watch them, or when they will become unwatchable, or even if you can watch them at all.
They will assume that you are a thief, and they will stop you from watching anything that you cannot absolutely prove that you have paid for. If there is any doubt, your screen will go blank, and you will have no right of reply, or opportunity to prove your innocence.
And the best part is that they will make you pay for the new hardware that will enable this.
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
Isn't that kind of like forcing people to use square cement wheels on their cars, to avoid allowing cars to be used to assist in a bank robbery?
"He may look like an idiot, and talk like an idiot, but don't let that fool you. He really is an idiot." - Duck Soup
This law, if it passes, will make impossible any real innovation in software development or networking technology. This would harm not only OEMs and other computer companies, it would harm the complete industry.
I don't even think Microsoft will like it. Sure, it might be a temporary advantage for them, as their Media Player already includes usage control technology. But what about their long-term visions? I wonder how they'll implement things like seamless distribution or storage- and location-irrelevance while at the same time making sure that the data stays where the RIAA wants it.
What does IBM think about this bill? They invested a lot of money in Linux, what do they think about Linux becoming illegal?
Sun's vision -- "The network is the computer" -- will effectively be impossible to realize if you can't store data "on the network" but must control where exactly it is.
In fact, the SSSCA denies the idea of a networked computer in favor of computers which are reduced to media player devices. The idea of being attached to a network is no longer communication, it is to be able to receive and pay for content. The media industry's vision is to turn computers into televisions, and this law is another step in making that vision a reality. I can imagine the RIAA and MPAA love the idea, but I have no idea why anyone in the computer industry (or any other industry) can support it.
The article talks about OEMs, does anyone know what the other industries, and big computer corporations like the three mentioned above think about this bill?
Sig (appended to the end of comments I post, 54 chars)
This legislation is obviously meant to setup government controls for keeping tabs on exactly what digital media the populus has access to. This certainly doesn't necessarily cry for an end to all linux! Unfrotunately what it will mean is a serious redirection in the way that distribution developers are allowed to distribute. We are looking at the possibility of future legislation enacted to establish mandatory (illegal to remove) source code in certain open source applications...and that is a scary thought...it's like the gov. is trying to block a rushing river with a stick and mud dam, they'll only succeed if they get enough people working together at once....sad thing is, they have the people to do it....
"that which does not kill me makes me bitter" -anon
Any Big corporation that acts lame normally is doing so as a last resort.
:) ) that pissed off it's customers and imposed a shitload of restrictions and played dirty, it's always the same pattern, "we got f*cked because we didn't do any DD nor looked after what's out there simply because we assumed we were the best and had total control over the market..." now that they realize they sat on their success and thought they had the perfect eternal cash cow, they don't accept it and instead of INNOVATING to surpass that (because usually the manager are proud incompetent morons that have no clue about newer technologies), they are simply playing dirty on EVERY level they can.
Look at ANY company you've seen (ok aside from microsoft
The only difference is now they still have a lot of cashflow and influence... If they would be fair, they'd developp a system WITH encryption and an honnor thing like you download the movie, you pay 2$, you watch it, it gets deleted or scrambled 48 hours later... what's bad about that? they generate a pile of money, they could sell that system to places like blockbusters, the technology exists, it's feasible (dvd-rw, cd-rw, whatever media), and people WOULD support it. Heck, I'd even support at 100% arresting someone who hacks these CD for a fraudulent usage because that would be really low, I do accept they have to generate income and protect their content, but not by doublecrossing us and limiting our use of a computer.
Now shoving a bill and using criminal laws to shove content up our butt is quite insulting, and will get the exact opposed reaction.
--- Metamoderating abusive downgraders since my 300th post.
I think the best way to explain this to "mom" is something like the following. Make a list of reasonable "fair use" activities that "mom" does currently. Then explain that these will be illegal and uncircumventable if this bill passes into law.
Anyone want to start such a list? Unfortunately my knowledge of the particulars of DMCA and SSSCA is limited beyond "it's bad and infringes on our rights".
Constitutionally Correct
Just give your friends and relatives the bottom line: this means you will have to spend a shitload of money to keep watching TV, or listening to music. This is the same thing that's going to leave HDTV stillborn. Large numbers of consumers are going to opt out of that mandatory conversion.
Secondly: the problem is that the general public won't care unless they see how this will hurt concretely; for this, the question needs to be strippend down to its essentials, which are nontechnical.
So let's do ourselves a favor. Forget all the beloved technical jargon we like to wrap these discussions in. Concentrate on something simple like email, which people know about, care for and roughly understand, and which already exhibits all aspects of the problem. Now publically ask Senators Hollings and Stevens and other backers of the proposal elementary questions like this:
Timeo idiotikOS et dona ferentes
... and I was desperately wondering wtf this was about. Since I don't read sigs (that's an option here) you didn't make very much sense.
/. Can't I just shut up...
Maybe next time you should ask yourself (before you hit submit): should I really be saying this on
NO FLAME INTENDED! I killed my own postings many times because they were not necessary. Not really.
(Please guys, hear me through before flaming or modding down.)
.... Damn! now we can't use linux (to view videos or listen to music)" "Hell, I don't want to build a computer using those parts that have built in copy control ..... damn, now I can't build my own computer!"
... Sure you like to, but it's not a necessity. As has been said before (that seems to fall on deaf ears), vote with your wallet. Don't buy that stuff that has the restrictions that you don't agree with. If people adapt this mentality, then 1 of 2 things will happen:
/. isn't going to accomplish anything. And I'm not really sure that sending emails/real mail to your congress is going to do anything either. Educate the public at large and you'll find out if either everyone thinks the same way, or if you are indeed just in the minority. If you can't get your mother and your computer illiterate significant other to get the least bit roused by this, the perhaps it isn't that big a deal after all.
Can someone please explain to me the exact portions of the bill that state that
a) you will not be allowed to run linux
b) you will not be allowed to build your own PC from commodity parts
??
What I see is "unlawful to manufacture, import, offer to the public, provide or otherwise traffic in any interactive digital device that does not include and utilize certified security technologies that adhere to the security system standards.". Which is basically saying that "if you want to have something that you can view multimedia on, it has to have built in digital copyright controls on it".
So what you're saying is: "Hey, hell no we won't put such things into linux!
While I am not saying that this is a good thing, don't you think that you all are going just a wee bit over the deep end with the exaggerations on this one?
Please tell me if I'm wrong, but I don't think that it is nearly as bad as you are claiming it to be. If linux were to implement these technologies (which, of course, the people who make linux would really, really, truly rather not do) then you could still use it. If you bought the hardware that conformed (which, btw, all hardware sold will so I don't see the argument there?) then you can still build your own computer.
Now, with that aside, this "proposed" legislation is shitty for the customers, but why is it? If you think about it, they are not preventing us from doing anything that the majority of customers don't already do. Now let me qualify that. What you are legally allowed to do is buy something and watch it. What this prevents is piracy, which BTW is illegal anyways. Piracy in this case means viewing it when you're not allowed/making copies/etc. Yep, it sucks. However we always break these laws anyways.
Oh, can someone please explain to me how the ability to copy a movie or music is a funamentally basic human right?
In any case, as with all things, if this does get passed and these restrictions are put on, and if you don't like it, nobody is making you buy that movie or listen to that music
1) the purchases of music/videos/etc will fall by the curb and the industries will be left scratching their heads going "wtf happened?"
-or-
2) the majority of people won't care and will still continue to buy the new restricted stuff anyways, and, in the eyes of the corps, they will not have lost.
Of course, if #2 happens then that means that you, my friends, are indeed in the minority and it's just because you want to illegally copy/pirate your stuff or get stuff for free, because the majority of people won't have seen a difference.
however if #1 happens, then it will turn out that everything that you are saying is correct, and justice will take care of itself.
Thus perhaps you should be putting your energies into the right place. If indeed this legislation does pass, (or even before it does), then lean on the same mechanisms that they use to promote this shit. Write your local newspapers. Create situations where this stuff truly is horrible. Tell your friends and neighbours. Put up billboards and posters. And certainly not the entire public are morons, they can see through shit, and if it is truly, absolutely horrible for the gross public then the gross public will respond.
Is everyone aware here that there are 5,000 children dying every month in iraq from malnutrition? check out the list of the top 30 atrocities of the 20th century, some of which are still continuing. And there's more that happens every day, in front of you, that you're too desensitized to look at. There's homeless (up to 700,000 each night sleeping on the streets, begging for money during the day), and many others.
Just a reminder that perhaps you guys with your DVD players and 28" televisions and well paying jobs and 1GHz+ computers might want to step back and take it all in perspective.
And finally, talk is cheap. If you are seriously angered by this, that's GREAT, seriously, so do something about it. I don't agree with this type of legislation any more than you do, but yelling/overexaggerating about it on
If God gave us curiosity
Nope, with these new laws the teams will be able to enforce the "no recording without prior consent of the baseball commisioner" clause. They simply instruct your TV and VCR to not allow you to record the game. Even if they do let you record it they can still control the length of time you have to watch it, or prevent you from keeping the "best game ever" for posterities sake.
Chris Kuivenhoven is a thief, beware
Trouble is, the big players spend a lot of time and money figuring out how to package the lie in FUD and mis-direction so that the only issues brought up for debate favor passage -- which IIRC is exactly how the DCMA was snuck through. I (for one) would love to get my hands on a definitive and complete copy of the legislative history of how often and how in depth "constitutionality" and "freedom" were at issue in the committees and floor debate when the DCMA was slipped through.
Best opportunity for us: get in touch en-masse with the representative branch of the US Gov'g with lucid, non-inflammatory communications that reference why the SSSCA and DCMA, etc. are in conflict with some of our most cherished rights (which do NOT include copyright theft, music or video piracy, by the way!), and get behind the EFF, etc. so that all of the issues are part of the debate.
And without declaring allegience to either party, campaign finance reform was defeated by a very narrow margin by politicians who are very closely allied with the big companies. So pushing the campaign finance reform onto your representative's legislative agenda is not a bad idea either.
...Open Source isn't the only answer -- but it's almost always a better value than the alternatives...
This is not just some industry boss having lost his mind.
Another greedy industry bought some politicians. The openness of bribery and shameless self-serving legislative activity in US politics continues to amaze me. If you Americans dont get to fixing your political system real soon, you will not have any democracy left worth defending, soon enough.
f.
From dictionary.com:
"greed (grd)
n. An excessive desire to acquire or possess more than what one needs or deserves, especially with respect to material wealth: "Many... attach to competition the stigma of selfish greed" (Henry Fawcett)."
The industry neither needs nor deserves such a wide sweeping and damaging act. Perhaps we need to remind our respective governments just how little the entertainment industry makes to the GDP of a country. Such small corporations should not be destroying the freedoms of everyone else.
I hope he's right.
Glad no other country (AFAIK) is doing anything this stupid. If this goes through, then the computer manufacturers (and anyone else who doesn't want to have to put this crap in their systems) will simply have to make the hardware elsewhere. A black market will emerge in America for "non-SSSCA hardware" from the rest of the world.
Can someone who's in the USA point this out to their senators, as the vote of a UK person doesn't go very far in America.....
Beware the psychokinetic mimes!
I know I have already said this, and it might sounds redundant or even flamebait. But I hate so much this kind of laws/acts that I think that it must be repeated over and over. Maybe then I can change people minds in a way nobody accept this anymore:
This new is a live proof that Money Rules the World, and for now we can't do anything. In the name of liberty big corporations maintain their lobbists so they can have aproved the law they want.
Of course there are always the electors interests, but many times it's much smaller then the money involved in such big consequences of the aprovement of this kind of laws/acts.
Don't you believe me? I won't be scared if MPAA/RIAA 'forces' the congress to discuss the prohibition of CD-R drives selling. It might no be voted, but I think that it might be at least discussed.
Hope this and a day. Once again: It's sad but true.
-=-=-=-=
I know life isn't fair, but why can't it ever be un-fair in MY favor!?
Stop going to the movies, buying music, etc. Vote with your wallet. Make it known that this behavior will NOT BE TOLERATED!
i can relate. i'm considering moving to australia (pending some research regarding their laws.)
i came to US looking for the 'land of the free' and 'land of opportunities'. well, i've had some success. i make a *nice* living. but lately, i've been reflecting on the laws that are being passed (DMCA comes to mind). the whole IP shabang.. now this. i know, it probably won't make it to becoming a law but knowing that my future as a lawful resident depends on the hands of some clueless lawmakers that take thousands and thousands of dollars (soft-money or otherwise) from coorporations that are intent on taking control of everything short of the oxygen i breathe i fail to see the free in 'the land of the free'. it's become 'the land of cartels' (explain RIAA and MPAA) and 'the land of bought politician' and 'the land of how much justice can you afford' and the land of just about everything but freedom.
granted you don't see my name on any of the change-logs on any opensource/GNU projects, i have been contributing in other ways -- writing key components for an american company that services companies worldwide. i consider myself as an active contributer to the american economy. lately, i'm seeing deminishing returns on my contributions. Apart from salary, a lawful, contributing resident comes to expect certain niceties from the government. and freedom, it seems, is exactly that -- a nicity. not the essentials; just a nicity.
i'd rather live with lower wages as long as i can continue to do what i love without interference. without the chokehold on both my throat and my beanbags.
it seems, if i do come up with something revolutionary i better have the dough to back it up. P2P with napster comes to mind. of course some mega corp is going to take interest since they would want not just a piece of the action by *all of it*. and would resort to the one great mechanism at work in america -- the law suits. so i've been very, very careful *not* to come up with anything remotely useful for the general public. in fact i have been very, very careful not to think of any ideas even. i sure don't have the money, or the politicians to protect it.
no one cares about IPs. it's not about coming up with new IPs or at least encouraging or creating the environment for new IPs. it's about *protecting* them. a key difference. gone are the days where the likes of wright brothers invented flying in their bike-shop. if you do the equivalent of that today in the digital world, you will essentially become a 'terrorist' (a hacker == a terrorist as some very bright leader put it)
my IPs are going to either my grave, or to australia or any other country where it's still about trying to foster development of 'em. not just about *protecting* and hoarding every halfwit-incomplete-though under the name of IP.
(i'm not certain about australia. that's just the first country that came to mind.)
Heaven forbid anyone modifies the internal design of my television! You YRO hippies make it sound like I wont be able to watch "all my favorite shows on the WB" without a masters degree in industrial-strength crypto. Give it a rest, and come back to the real world where no ones out to get you.
Bowie J. Poag
There is a trade-off here - the content creators are encouraged to produce content and make it public in some form, opening it to the possibility of unlawful distribution, while we can benefit from this content, but are in turn required by law to respect the creator's rights to control first sale distribution and in some cases derivative works. Recent laws seem to be taking away the potential for benefit from produced content while also enacting stricter regulations on and penalties for unlawful redistribution. In other words, creators/providers win on both counts, citizens/consumers lose on both counts.
- DMCA - 300 letters,
- Health care privacy - 40,000
- Home Schooling - 500,000+
Those physical letters count most. See the acm letter or the EFF for examples.Find your congressman and senators, write them letters, and mail them. Mail your own representatives. As a voter in their district you matter most to them. (Email is much less effective. They know about spam just like you do.) Whenever this issue moves into another stage (e.g., draft, committee, floor) write another.
If you want handbooks, check out Congressional Quarterly. The book Lobbying Congress, How the system works is quite relevant, although perhaps disturbing to some. It was written by lobbyists for lobbyists. You will also get other relevant hits with a "lobbying congress" query on Amazon.
..is to do away with lobbying of governmental representatives of the people by large corporations. (actually, screw that, small corporations also).
Return to a situation where your government actually made & upheld laws based on what was best for the people, not what is best for some special-interest group with a fat wallet.
And hurry up about it, I'm turning blue.
Why is it that many people who claim to support standards have such atrocious spelling and grammar?
In Section 2 of the bill, Findings, there appears "[TO BE SUPPLIED]". In other words, they'll make the law first, then "find" the facts to support the law later.
Unless they cut a deal with the MPAA, getting other concessions for their lack of opposition. Just think, the MPAA could ban all of those BAD foreign components that didn't have the joint CEIA/MPAA seal of approval, which takes many years of verification to receive due to its rigorous nature. Of course, American manufacturers (and their South Asian partners) get first crack at being tested.
Don't think something like this can happen? This is business. The electronics industry isn't in this for free speech or any other such ideological crap. As long as they can keep making a buck, they're happy.
That is all.
Let's make cars illegal because some drunk may use it as a weapon on someone.
This is definitely what this country's legal system is not about. What ever happened until "innocent until proven guilty"?
I like fire ants. They are very spicy!
Divx didn't fail because DVD enthusiasts made it look bad, it failed because ultimately consumers didn't want to watch movies in the way that the Divx backers had envisioned. The miscalculation was that consumers would be okay with the notion of something they buy but don't actually own. This concept was confusing, complex, privacy invading, and pointless.
The reason I make this point is that I think this is an inappropriate comparison to what we are looking at with this new potential law. Here we see the possibility of a choice being made for consumers by politicians and their lobbyist backers. Trying to explain this stuff to the average consumer is difficult because it is somewhat abstract. They will say that the media producers have the right to make money from what is rightfully theirs and it's okay for the government to support that with legislation. When they have no choice but to pay per view, they'll go with the only choice they have and likely not think twice about it. Perhaps I'm just too ravingly cynical but I don't think an appeal to the people is going to be terribly effective here.
This sig has been temporarily disconnected or is no longer in service
this is old news. search slashdot for some articles posted in december/january.
furthermore, i refuse to believe that apple computer would roll-over and play dead on this. nor will gateway... or dell. they aren't on any of those lists, and they are major players in the personal computing sector. motorola, amd, and western digital were absent from the list of industry titans as well.
speaking from experience... i know several people who have bought those tiny sony "mp3" players. after they took them home and realized how much of a pain in the ass sending music from the computer to the little network walkman would be, they either returned the device, or stopped using it. divx anyone?
hopefully the trial involving that russian programmer being hassled here in america will be seen before the courts, and the dmca will be declared unconstitutional.
Do you wanna know what's going to happen? Big companies (like HP and IBM) will stop production and research activities in US. The money they spend today in americans university will be spent in other countries universities, like Brazil, India or China. In US there will be only the offices, all the production will be done in foreing countries or foreign countries.
The high-tech jobs will be discontinued, many will be fired out. All US will have to use Windows or OS/2 or another "new" OS that will probably be supported by the government.
The technology research will be affected, no company will finance a research, because most of the money will go to the lawyers' hands. Meanwhile in other countries, where is much easier to develop technologies, the big corporations will finance more and more resarches and will help the development of know-how all over the world (all over the world but in US).
The high geeks will leave US, the gurus will find better jobs in foreign countries, all technology production will leave US. Most of the FreeSoftware comunity will leave, and then, maybe one day, US will ban the internet.
Much more horrible things might happen, this is just a few reactions. Let's wait to see what will happen.
Maybe I'm beeing too pessimist, but at least 70% of all I have said will happen.
-=-=-=-=
I know life isn't fair, but why can't it ever be un-fair in MY favor!?
The EFF has a large page on the SSSCA, complete with sample letters for your Congresscritters, and information on how to contact them. Check out the EFF Action Alert: Defeat the SSSCA.
We can stand around all day and yammer, but the more of us who write *and* call our Congressfolks, the more our voices are heard.
We plan to make audio and maybe video of the talks available online for those of you who aren't in MN. Perhaps Slashdot will carry a link when it's available.
For more info, check out the Minnesotans for Fair Copyright mailing list.
I for some bizzare reason chose to watch the film "Hannibal" about three days after WTC. I eventually had to take a day off to get all of the colliding images out of my mind. Because what kept going through it was this: "Bowels in or out, Mr. Bin Laden? You seem confused . . . suppose I decide for you . . ."
Haven't your maggots (er, politicians) got bigger things on their plate too?
Apparently not. And people keep voting for Republicans and Democrats, as if they are going to be better than the last ones.
I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
There really needs to be a citizens rights lobby group that can have people on our side to fight this crap. The industries have them, but the people do not. Our (elected!)Representivites are supposed to speak for us, but as we all know they do not do so at all. This all needs to get struck down, this Crap the DMCA all of it.
Power Corrupts,Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely, leaving one person(group)in charge is absolutely corrupt.
That should be enough to get on with.
There are reasons why democracy does not work nearly as well as capitalism.
-- David D. Friedman
Welcome, we want you !
Note how this (like the DMCA before) is aimed at the average consumer, and definitly not against criminals. It's aim is to make criminals out of anyone who wants to View/Copy/Transmit any piece of content in ways not approved by the RIAA and MPAA. This includes cutting out advertisement, playing a piece of Music as often, whereever, whenever, and to as large an audience and in as good a quality as you want. Also anyone who wants to create, market or distribute content (that is anyone possibly competing with established industry to make money from content) finds himself at a disadvantage: he has to pay license fees for encoding, probably needs to set up a huge infrastructure or again pay for the use of an infrastructure to distribute his content in the 'right way' (since he can't just distribute an mp3, but needs to provide servers to serve the 'keys' necessary to unlock his content), and generally has to build his business modell around some very rigid legislation and the technology it allows.
Anyone who is ripping off and selling content in Volume won't be affected anyway. He is already engaged in criminal activity, using unauthorized soft/hardware is the least of his worries, and to believe this hardware/software wouldn't be available because of such legislation is just plain ridiculous. Probably directions how to remove the copyprotection will be available all over the net, like it was with disabling DVD-Region-Codes.
What is happening is, that the Record- and Movie Industries want their old business protected by laws. But the internet and the digital representation of content have already changed the world, and change always means hard times for established business, but it also means opportunities for new business. Adhering to the old ways means leaving out these opportunities, and if the USA as a country choose not to use these opportunities, they may find, that other countries are not willing to do so for the sake of Disney.
This is a lot like legislating that every car has to have a horse running in front of it after the event of the Otto motor, just to ensure, that all the industry around horses doesn't go out of business. I think even the USA can't afford to abandon the technological progress the new media will bring, and these laws will only help to establish the old industry for the next 10 years or so, at the cost of halting progress on that sector for about the same time.
"By the way if anyone here is in advertising or marketing... kill yourself." -- Bill Hicks
Nope, the laws allows you to time-shift television broadcasts. So, they'll have to get a little more devious--just shift over to live performance on some website. Then, time-shifting will be illegal, when any reasonable person would assume it's no longer necessary. That's the problem with this law--it's an attempt to say, ``Fair use is for obsolete or soon-to-be-obsolete technologies. Strict copyright is for new ones.''
They'd abolish fair use for obsolete techs, too, but the courts won't let them. Hopefully the courts can see through this ruse, though.
There are reasons why democracy does not work nearly as well as capitalism.
-- David D. Friedman
You know, this new regulation will stop Moore's Law cold. People will no longer want to buy new, restricted computers; instead, those old Pentium 4 2 GHZs will be in hot demand. There'll be no other way to display your content. Demand for new machines will drop, and the funds for research will no longer be there.
Ever since a Federal law was passed in 1994 banning certain features in new or imported guns, there has been a brisk market in "pre-ban" weapons; expect a similar situation in the computer market.
This should be really fun when computers get fast enough to run virtual machines that can decode MPEG. How's the hardware going to tell if you're viewing restricted content when the viewing operation isn't even in the same machine code?
Now is the time to rise up and fight. Since most of us don't have the money required to get any attention in Washington, we have to use old-fashioned letter writing campaigns. I wrote Senator Hollings twice so far. Once after the first /. story, and once a couple weeks ago. (I was a little peeved that I hadn't seen a response yet. I am one of his constituents)
If you sit idly by and hope this one will fail because "the system" will defeat it, you will have defeated the system. In the US, the people are part of the system. Granted, the part that is most often ignored except at election time, but we are a part. If you wait for other parts of the system to fix this, you will be disappointed. Just look at the DMCA. We're still waiting for the system to fix that one.
Write your senators and representatives. Don't wait for Disney to buy their vote. Make it clear to them that you will not vote for their re-election if they vote for the SSSCA.
What incentive is there for our congressmen to vote the way we'd like if their term is up? If I was them, I'd be trying to make as much money as I can and not care about my voters. The fastest way I can think of is to court corporations.
Even if their term wasn't going to expire, races have become so expensive is it any wonder that they listen to lobbyist?
I think we are getting caught up in a symptom when we really need to fix the problem, voter apathy and soft money contributions.
"Only one thing, is impossible for god: to find any sense in any copyright law on the planet." Mark Twain
Neo was selling bootleg Linux at the begining of The Matrix ...
-- www.globaltics.net
Political discussion for a new world
I've said this before, but I thought it was worth bringing up again here...
You can send a fax to all of your congressmen via aclu.org even easier than you can send an email. If you go to http://www.aclu.org/action/liberty107.html, at the bottom of the page you will see an option to fax your congressmen. It will figure out who they are based on your physical address and fax them whatever content you enter into the web form.
I don't want to repost the whole thing here, but I posted the letter that I wrote to my congressmen regarding the SSSCA and the other recent oppressive IP legislation. If you're writing a letter to your congressmen, you might use it for fodder.
1) US Congress signs unconstitutional law into existance (See DMCA.)
2) US Pressures other WTO countries into signing treaties making these laws pertain to their own homelands.
3) US Supreme court declares the law unconstituional.
4) Other countries are now stuck supporting IP laws which help keep them in the information economy third world.
So you see, this is actually an evil plan to fuck the rest of the world over and maintain the US technical edge.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
I'm a firmware developer at a large *large* computer company. When attempting to get a brand new system to boot we'll frequently turn off or disable portions of the hardware... you know: minimize the variables we have to deal with.
:-(
Guess what? Under this law I'd be a felon because I'd be disabling this stuff. And the fact I'm working for a computer company developing a new system wouldn't shield me from criminal prosecution. If this goes through, I'll be looking to change to a safer job... developing children's applications perhaps (since that's the level this country is coming to).
--Rob
Unlike the DMCA, there actually seems to be alot of opposition this time.
We may have a decent chance of winning this one...
LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
you'll have to wait a few years till we finish killing off ourselves. If any foreign enemy shows, that would be enough to unite us, and their are enough guns in private hands to supply any 3 armies.
errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
I am currently building up an anti-SSSCA task force in the Washington D.C. area. So far things are just restricted to swapping emails, and planning to meet at the Open Source conference in DC on October 10. Anyone who wants to help and can offer something useful (Political connections, previous experience, legal advice, etc.) feel free to send me an email (supabeastatsupabeastdotorg.). Please no random "I want to help but can't offer anything other than writing letters." emails, as I am a bit short on time right now!
SSSCA is pronounced "Ceska"
When it comes to the point of 'infinite extension' of copyright, you're a little vague, and I suspect blamingthings on the DMCA that should instead be blamed on the Sonny Bono Copyright Extension Act. The DMCA did not of itself extend any copyright periods, Sonny Bono's legislation did that. You should probably make sure the "credit" goes where it's due.
On the other hand, the DMCA does not make adequate protection for copyright expiration. Buried into the bowels of the thing, there should be provisions for some sort of time-based revocation of access protection. AFAIK, there is no expiry in place for any content-protected media. Apparently, by the omission the DMCA in no way protects the concept of public domain.
Hey ma, if this passes, it's going to be a lot harder to tape your soaps.
The SSSCA combined with the DMCA will make traditional copyright laws pointless.
If the DMCA makes it a criminal offense to bypass copy control protections, and the SSSCA requires that all devices use copy control protections the copyright is effectively made permanent. Even when/if the copyright expires, it will be illegal to transfer the content from the originally purchased media. And illegal to use anything but legally produced players.
Add to that expiring media or players that refuse to play content out of copyright and corporations can basically maintain absolute control over the content.
penguinicide... when jumping out a window just won't do.
...I'll have a little fun with this and write a letter to each US states' congressman, telling them how delighted I am that the US restricts innovation of its IT industry and freedom of its citizens, using methods that are unconstitutional in my country and thus making sure that my country will gain an advantage over US research & corporations... :-)
------------------
You may like my a cappella music
That's not how the game is played.
Hollywood doesn't care who loses, so long as they win.
The electronic manufacturers are playing the same game, as long as they win they don't care who gets screwed.
That's why this proposed legislation would have "all" the industry players get together and hash out a solution agreeable to "all",
which Congress can then pass without getting their hands dirtry. "We just rubber stamped what the experts in the industry said we needed."
This is how they got the DMCA passed; the "all" at the table won't include you.
The DMCA represents the new model for passing legislation of this type.
If you want a seat at the table, you need to speak up now.
The thing about things we don't know is we often don't know we don't know them.
If we can spin this to Joe Citizen as
:)
"Congress is looking at a new bill that will make it illegal to tape TV shows",
we could create enough of an uproar that at least Joe C will be aware of this bill.
Even if your mom hears "The bill doesn't make it illegal to tape TV shows, it will just make it more difficult", Mom's not gonna be happy to see it pass.
No need for the media companies to be the only capable PR flacks; I'll let the end justify the means here
I'm not so sure.
Digital TV isn't selling. There's a giant squabble about how to roll it out, and there are a few people buying the first generation, but how many times will even a rich dumb guy be willing to shell out for new tech once the old goes incompatible? The state of affairs is looking so dire that IIRC the FCC is considering -retiring the analog broadcast spectrum- to drive digital sales.
DivX didn't sell. People didn't want someone telling them 'you've only rented the content, now you have to pay to use it.'
Ebooks don't sell. Duh. There isn't anything going for ebooks in terms of convenience, and people realize that putting content in digital form comes with controls that -take rights away- they're accustomed to having in books.
DAT didn't sell. SCaMS (Serial Copy Management System) killed it.
So - when SSSCA-protected content comes out, only the -latest- hardware will be able to display it. All the other hardware won't. The thinking appears to be that people will just rush out in droves to buy the new compliant hardware.
Bet they won't. I bet they'll say 'bring it to me, so I can see it on -my- machine right now." The idea that selling can be -driven- is wrong and getting wronger. And imagine driving it by telling people "The computer you have now is illegal." The answer will be "OK, screw it, if my computer is that bad I'll just forget the whole thing."
If you want to see the entertainment industry pleading for a bailout, watch what happens when they try to push this crap on people who don't understand.
They don't even need to move to a website... Sec. 103 (b) allows time-shifting only for "an over-the-air broadcast, non-premium cable channel, or non-premium satellite channel". How long until the only things broadcast over-the-air are ads for programs only available on "premium channels"? For that matter, do the "extended basic" channels (like Sci-Fi, Cartoon Network, CNN, Discovery, History) that seem to be the only ones I watch already count as "premium channels"?
.sig is available on the ".sig channel" for only $2.99 a month...Sign up now!!!
--
My
Furthermore, conservative judges tend to be strict constitutionalists (they've been striking down laws right and left not because they're bad laws, but because they are not permitted by the constitution. A recent example is a law against spousal abuse. Because it does not affect interstate commerce, they decreed that it was under state, rather than federal, jurisdiction). Liberal judges, otoh, tend to do more moral wrangling. Roe vs. Wade is a classic example of a liberal Supreme Court decision. Most of us are very happy with the outcome, but I think it's pretty obvious that the decision was was on exceedingly thin legal ground.
"The question of whether a computer can think is no more interesting than that of whether a submarine can swim" -EWD
Just about a decade ago, this was called "communism."
Sig (appended to the end of comments I post, 54 chars)
...maybe we'll start reading again.
Naaahhhh. America's been turned into a nation of sheep.
you're so very right, and yet, in the Linux/Slashdot user bloodlust I'm sure that this will not even matter to them, after all, THEY HAVE SELINUIX, and it's from the NSA, so what do they want in OpenBSD eh? hehe, fools. I agree with you, but we're definitely the minority.
I despise this as much as the rest of you, but can you really blame them? If you spent $300 million making, say, LOTR, would you want it on Napster? If you really want to put an end to misguided efforts like this, come up with a technical solution that preserves a user's valid rights while also protecting the content owner's rights not to be ripped off.
For years, non-americans has seen the USA as a big movie itself, and relinquishing the control of all data-processing devices to Hollywood merely confirms this fact.
This ultimately proves that the United States of America is nothing but a bullshit country.
That's fine, then, the rest of the world will happily ignore the US.
A tad long, perhaps. I always draft 2 different letters. The long version I send/FAX only to my immediate U.S. Senators and Representative. If a key committeeman is from my state then I send them the long version as well. Everyone else gets the short version. 1 page. Concise and to-the-point with maybe 3 or 4 bulleted items to focus on.
/.ers could really use: a Congressional database complete with names, mailing addresses, phone and FAX numbers, committee memberships and in ready-to-use form for mailing labels, FAX and email address-book entries, etc.
Something we
What I see is a future in, say, 25 years, where I'm teaching my grandson how to disable the copy controls in our State-supplied EntBox so we can watch old DVD-format movies I had in the attic. I'm teaching him how to shield the GPS trackers in his car (serviceable ONLY at State centers) so he can go to Bible Study/IP Revolution meetings. I'm teaching him how to run an ancient PC we keep buried and wrapped in lead to prevent its detection.
Dammit, I should be teaching him how to fish.
Listen, I'm not a super-paranoid individual, but I honestly see the potential, years down the road, where we've lost our IP freedoms bit by bit until we don't remember what fair use was...
GTRacer
- I don't remember signing anything...
Defending IP by destroying access to it? That makes sense, RIAA/MPAA. Go to the corner until you can play nice!
We are headed for horrible things, right now only the Supreme court (The constitution is toast when one of them dies. They won't retire, even they don't trust Bush.), public proof of treason by someone like Archroft, or bringing guns to bear can save us from fascist oppression. Americans no longer seek justice or even truth, just a comfey couch and proof of our superiority.
Let us know how things are there for a open sourcish computer geek, we may have to run for our lives.
I hope they eraticate campain contibutions in DC. I would hate to see the fight for the USA's freedom decided between the royalties new royalty and the Timmothy McVeighs of the world. shivver......
I wonder who is next after the geeks. Maybe we should all wear pink square floppy disks patches on our jackets and check into camps now. Look, I am so frustrated with ignorance I invoked Godwins law on myself.
Novel theory: Modern Man evolved from psychopath
What exactly is known about what the Framers intended for copyright/patent? I know that Ben Franklin was against it initially, but don't know any specifics. Did the Framers have any idea that copyright would become the nightmare that it is now, where bascially all material is bound up in a few very powerful companies, to the detriment of (almost) all in the society? Did they intend for copyrights and patents to be help by companies (of any sort, big or small) at all, or just by individuals?
What exactly is on record about what the Framers (of the U.S. Constitution) intended for copyright/patent? I know that Ben Franklin was against it initially, but don't know any specifics. Did they have any idea that copyright would become the nightmare that it is now, where bascially all material is bound up in a few very powerful companies, to the detriment of (almost) all in the society? Did they intend for copyrights and patents to be help by companies (of any sort, big or small) at all, or just by individuals?
Except that some of them are on both sides themselves - and choose the user-hostile route every time.
sulli
RTFJ.
That would be an unfair non-tariff barrier to trade that Taiwan et al. could challenge before the WTO...
> owning that old Pentium 4 2GHZ computer
> will be illegal
Nope. Read the proposal. They're grandfathered in.
Hey, as long as Disney provides good feelies, then I'm just happy. Soma!
Slashdot: Failed Car Analogies. Amateur Lawyering. Anecdote Battles.
6. Running a high-volume Microsoft CD bootlegging operation with illegal aliens in your basement.
Slashdot: Failed Car Analogies. Amateur Lawyering. Anecdote Battles.
Laws like this only hurt the honest people, the people who pay for their software, movies and music. The SSSCA will only encourage the pirates to pirate more and provides a wonderful incentive to the common person to go out and pirate. If this isn't stopped these people will bring a downfall to the whole monetary system and throw us into a 100 year depression. This does more to undermine free enterprise than any communist ever.
http://www.congress.org/
I recomend that slashdot have a counter going showing the amount of the bribes accepted by various senators from the media industry. And yes, they are bribes pure and simple.
Second point is that the IT industry can't comply with the bill if it wanted to. There are many working groups that have been developing DRM standards - MPEG, IETF-DRM, XACML and others. Lack of interest has not been the problem, the difficulty of converging the technology is very high.
In particular the incompetence of the USPTO which has granted thousands of spurious patent claims in the area prevents a workable agreement being reached. There are too many overlapping rights to build a workable system without a serious risk of being sued. This despite the fact that there is prior art for paractically all the technologies.
Legislative fiat will not speed up the technology efforts, in fact they will retard the process. The manufacturers know that if they call the studios bluff and refuse to agree that they can play out the end game in the law courts for decades.
The best way to derail the effort is by reminding congress of the lies they were fed to pass the DMCA. Even Orin Hatch has realized he was had. In particular the clause introduced by the recording industry that tried to grab the returned rights of recording artists was so eggergious that Congress repealled it without demanding fresh bribes.
Also the comparison should be continually to the demands made when recording technology first became mass market. The publishers fought to prevent cassette tape and the VCR from being sold - and lost conclusively.
At the end of the day the recording industry has nowhere near the influence of the computer industry. Quite a few computer companies have revenues greater than those of all the recording companies and film studios combined.
Congress is not about to severely damage its most successful industry by far in order to protect an industry that is far from struggling.
Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
He is the one that got the law passed that forbids senators and congressman to pay their staff salaries with tax money(legalized payola). The way it is now a typical congressman has to raise 10,000 to 15,000 dollars a day just to pay his support staff (if they are on any committes it goes way up).Are you giving this money to him? I think not. He cant stay in Washington and do his job correctly without a staff, so the people with the money have the voice.
Get a grip.
Look at most countries of the world (the Taliban-government Afghanistan comes to mind, but there are countless others) and look at the history of the world and you'll realize just how much freedom you have.
Freedom is the ability to say whatever you want, go whereever you want, do whatever you want. Talk to whoever you want, marry whoever you want. Believe whatever you want. Worship (or not worship) however you want. Have kids if you want. Not have kids if you want. Heck, if you're an IT guy, you're certainly not even trapped by more practical concerns like poverty.
You have more freedom than most people in the history of the world, and more freedom than most people living the world today. How many people in the world today can just pick up and move to Australia?
OK, now that we've got some perspective on that:
gone are the days where the likes of wright brothers invented flying in their bike-shop. if you do the equivalent of that today in the digital world, you will essentially become a 'terrorist'
Where the fuck do you come up with that? Even if the laws against hacking are too tough, you still have to *break into somewhere* or *crack someone's protection* to do it. Those acts are not the equivalent of inventing flight. Sorry.
And if you think any country has a perfect system when trying to weight economic concerns vs. freedom concerns, you're welcome to go there. I'll give you a hint: Australia is just as bad (or worse) than the States.
if i do come up with something revolutionary i better have the dough to back it up. P2P with napster comes to mind.
Um, Gnutella hasn't really needed any money to florish. But anyway...
You think the Wright brothers developed commercial airplanes without large investors? It is the nature of the capitalist system that money is needed to develop ideas. Don't like that? Well, going to Australia isn't going to help. You're going to have to go to a non-capitalist society that still develops tons of new and innovative ideas... just like... well, I'm sure you can think of one.
We live in an imperfect world, with imperfect compromises. Any country that deals with the US economically is going to follow the US' lead when it comes to freedoms and copyright. If you feel so strongly about this that you think it's worth making drastic changes in your life, devote yourself to fighting it. Have you even written your congress-people? Moving to one of the US' client states isn't going to do you or anyone else any favours.
On the other hand, if you want to move to Australia for the sun and scuba-diving, go right ahead.
Expanding a vast wasteland since 1996.
Good point. The larger question, of course, is how long it'll take Congress to start finding principles (rather than loopholes) in court decisions.
:)
My bet: not before the revolution.
My bet on when the revolution will happen: about two years after the heat death of the Universe
There are reasons why democracy does not work nearly as well as capitalism.
-- David D. Friedman
A war, a depression, another war a time of liberalism, then a technological boom (of course by this time it means the reinvention of the wheel). This century will be an exact duplicate of last.
There would be even more difficulties for linux.
Hard drives, sound cards, cpus, monitors might all end up with SSSCA sub systems on them. Writing drivers to interact with those those things will probably requiring paying "reasonable" per cpu licensing fees. Undoubtably the reasonable license will require non disclosure either to comply with the law or because the license holder wants it that way. Those kinds of restrictions are utterly incompatible with an open source system.
Depending on what kind of system is adopted, if the system can be worked around at the OS level, clearly open source OSes would be seen as circumvention points. Bye bye open source OSes, I knew you well.
Aye, Verily do I also say unto thee, it will be easier for Dancing Boy Bands to get respect on the College Radio circuit than for Americans to give up their divertainments in order to [re]gain peace and freedom.
Not willing to fight for your rights? Then this is what you get. Even if you are willing to(in the US, anyway), not enough of your fellow non-voters are, so give up.
I used to only make that comment in an ironic fashion [i.e., the lame attempt to shock/offend others/yourself out of their/your inaction], but now I can say it with total sincerity. I think there's already too much momentum in the degenerate parts of "the system" to be stopped and rebuffed by the socially brilliant, powerful parts of "the system".
ps postmodernity will be the death of postmodern humanity
pps log rolls over we'll all be dead
ppps Adventure Frightens Me. Buy more stuff to weigh me down.
pppps The first rule of emotional self-cannabilization is, you always do talk about self-cannabilization
Hollywood, Television, has become the dream machine. We need to take that back; each of us is a Dream Machine
What's with the numbers in the quote?
So, if this legislation passes, this could be the straw that breaks the camel's back and makes all of us engineers decide to leave America. I wonder if there are any countries that would be good places for engineers to move to. Perhaps they can let us know by promoting themselves with some slogan such as "Land for those who are fed up with Hollywood and their well-paid-for representatives in congress who are completely destroying the quality of life in America." Please start telling us who you are so that way I can make my arrangements.
<rant> Hollywood for the most part is a bunch of people who cannot produce anything of value and have long since forgotten about creative endeavour. When was the last time a good movie came out? They maybe produce one good film a year if they're lucky. Why protect anything these people produce. Who is watching it? If the American masses are more interested in this crap than their right to be free, then maybe it is time to leave. I am not going to buy anymore dvd's or cds, and I will never take my kids to Disneyworld.
</rant>
So, by virtue of creating an environment where the people they want to keep are growing increasingly unhappy about the laws they are implementing, they perpetuate this fact. Way to go..."Hey, where is everyone going? Don't you like our nicely circumvented freedoms?" I hear Canada is still open for business...
-- The Hollow Man
Non illegitimati carborundum
I just read the definition of an "interactive digital device" in the SSSCA draft. The little keyless access goody to unlock my car qualifies. It transmits, receives, and stores information in digital form. And this requires a copy protection device to protect Disney et al's intellectual property? You gotta be kidding!
How will industrial factories be affected by this? Will industrial machine control systems be required to contain MPAA/RIAA-approved hardware and software? (Yes; Geeks always use industrial machines to pirate music.)
How will medical systems be affected by this? Will every computerized medical device contain MPAA/RIAA-approved hardware and software? (Yes; Geeks always use medical devices to pirate music.)
How will the automotive industry be affected by this? Will emissions control computers be required to contain MPAA/RIAA-approved hardware and software? (Yes; Geeks always use their distance-speed sensor to pirate music.)
How will NASA be affected by this? Will new satellites be required to contain MPAA/RIAA-approved hardware and software? (Yes; Geeks have always pirated music through Voyager II.)
How will airlines be affected by this? Will new flight control systems and air traffic control towers be required to contain MPAA/RIAA-approved hardware and software? (Yes; Geeks use box-cutters to pirate music through airline communication systems.)
How will handheld calculators be affected by this? Will calculators be required to contain MPAA/RIAA-approved hardware and software? (Yes; Real Geeks have always computed the MPEG encoding manually.)
I have a better solution: Let's just have sensors with satellite-phone transmitters installed directly in our brains. These sensors will contact the gestapo whenever we think about viewing or listening to content without first paying the copyright holder for each instance.
CONGRESS.SYS corrupt. Reboot Washington DC? (Y/n)
I'm starting to understand how you feel. Not everything out there insults my intelligence. But as the IP Gestapo starts using more and more insidious legal and technological mechanisms to control what we see and hear, I've seriously started going out of my way to be insulted.
Soon the book publishers will realize what a great racket this is, and the library as we know it will be history. Then we "conscientious objectors" of the American economy will get to be *really* pretentious. I'll miss Tom Clancy, but I've always wanted an excuse to reread "The Red Badge of Courage."
You want the truthiness? You can't handle the truthiness!
Divx smelled like dogshit without any help from "DVD activists", who did little more than excite themselves (not that there's anything wrong with that...). Hardly anyone else noticed. But practically everyone noticed that Divx offered them less, for more. That's why it died.
Edith Keeler Must Die
considering how fast Britain adopts policy created in the US, I wouldn't be so smug.
you can bet your ass corporation will push this in Britain. I would be surprised if there not doing so right now under some other guise.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
the generality of this is obvious. Even the use of the word "technology" in the context it was could ban anything from a high-tech unlicensed fileserver, down to anything the supreme court deems "technology."... now isn't that convenient...
Oh, can someone please explain to me how the ability to copy a movie or music is a funamentally basic human right?
It's not, but it is a constitutional right. Fair use: I can do what I like with my stuff. For instance, I own an astronomical number of CD's. Many of them are imports, which often cost me $30 USD. A blank cd costs $0.30. I archive the orignals, and play the copies. If I sit/step on a $0.30 cd, I am out 5 minutes labor and $0.30... If I step/sit on a a rare import, I am probably SOL (the band doesn't exist, they aren't printing anymore, ad nauseum). It also opens the doorway to further watering down the civil liberties of the citizens of the USA. There is more, but posting from work has it's disadvantages...
Most likely line numbers, because he cut and pasted from another site (not that there is anything wrong with that :P)
Remember the good old Cold War days when they told you that every photocopier in the USSR was registered with the government and they collected sample output from every typewriter just in case a dissident used one?
Godless Demopublicans.
just imagine. actually having to pay money for movies and music and pr0n.
pathetic.
Freedom is the ability to say whatever you want...
You can say whatever you want anywhere in the world provided you don't say it out loud. Same is true here. We love to say we believe in free speech but after you've taken away speech that is politically incorrect, speech that might be interpreted as "terroristic", speech that violates the DMCA, and speech with obscenities there isn't much left worth talking about.
go whereever you want...
Who doesn't get to go where they want? You mean people who can't afford tickets? Well, the same is true here... if you can't pay your way, you can't go that way. Or do you mean free travel in the sense of not having to show "your papers." Have you flown on a plane anytime since TWA-800?
do whatever you want...
Can't smoke a doobie, can't grow a plant, can't treat myself for a disease I think I have with a medicine I think cures it... what the fuck are you talking about, do whatever I want, I can't do even the most basic of all things every organism since the beginning of time has been able to do, ingest the substance of my choice!
Talk to whoever you want...
Show me a country where this is restricted in a way that isn't over here.
marry whoever you want...
In most states I can't marry a guy if I'm a guy and a babe if I'm a babe.
Believe whatever you want...
If I keep it to myself, sure. Show me another country that's different.
Worship (or not worship) however you want...
Tell that to the native Americans or the Rastafarians, both denied sacraments they consider vital to their faith thanks to the war on drugs.
Have kids if you want...
I might be able to have them but there's no guarantee they won't be taken away simply because the state doesn't like my lifestyle. Happens all the time.
Not have kids if you want...
Yes, in America we have the right to not do things. Well, to not do everything but pay taxes.
Heck, if you're an IT guy, you're certainly not even trapped by more practical concerns like poverty.
No, it looks like if you're an IT guy you're going to be trapped by something far worse, your knowledge of technology that it appears the government is going to label verboten.
Sell it somewhere else.
Is this truly the only Earth I can live on?
would make a nice landing spot for my fat cock
to the moderator who slapped the score on this from 3 to 0 (obviously a personal attack):
hope you like meta-moderation!
were you just jealous of my karma? did it feel good to knock me down after other moderators gave me 3 points today alone?
When I read that statement, I couldn't help but think that it sounds sort of like some of those chain letters that circulate around. If someone were to start a chain letter with this sort of content describing what the SSSCA will do and tell them to forward it to 10 people and write their senators or something, it might have interesting results...
I don't see how you can put this without it sounding a little alarmist. Disney wants you to purchase a new TV, DVD, VCR/TiVo and cable decoder... that they will then control. Every time you place a DVD or VCR that you own or have rented in the devices that you bought, Disney will decide whether you are allowed to watch it, and how many times. Disney will decide whether you may tape shows to watch later, and how many times you can watch them, or when they will become unwatchable, or even if you can watch them at all. They will assume that you are a thief, and they will stop you from watching anything that you cannot absolutely prove that you have paid for. If there is any doubt, your screen will go blank, and you will have no right of reply, or opportunity to prove your innocence. And the best part is that they will make you pay for the new hardware that will enable this.
]]Most likely line numbers, because he cut and pasted from another site (not that there is anything wrong with that :P)
those numbers are the verse numbers as marked in most editions of the christian bible; as cuttededed and pasteded from bible.com
all this damn computer work has given me a moderate RSI, so I try not to type big paragraphs of text that can be pasted from elsewhere. why duplicate the typing effort somebody else has already done? think of it as "open-source" typing. hehe, okay that was silly but oh well...
Hollywood, Television, has become the dream machine. We need to take that back; each of us is a Dream Machine
After reading about the SSSCA, I wrote my Senators (FL) expressing opposition to the proposed legislation. For good measure, I wrote my Representative as well - Mike Bilirakis, 9th District FL.
I received a reply soon after.
The opening to his reply to me was:
"Thank you for contacting me in opposition to the proposed Security Systems Standards and Certification Act. I appreciate hearing from you. At this time, I am unaware of any such legislation that has been introduced by Senator Fritz Hollings or anymember of the House of Representatives."
OK, So I thought to myself, give him the benefit of the doubt. Not every congressman can be aware of every proposed piece of legislation.
Then looking over the letter I notice the letterhead, which listed all of the Committees on which Bilirakis sits. There it was: Member, Telecommunications and the Internet Subcommittee.
I shook my head in dismay at the apparent cluelessness. As a member of that particualr subcommittee, shouldn't a congressmen be a little more aware of pending and proposed legislation? Nice to see our elected rep's are taking these things so seriously.
Oh wait -- maybe they just wait for their friendly industry lobbyist to show up and "educate" them on the facts they need to know.
No offence to the US people, but your congressmen are stupid. Enforcing now this and now that law that makes most of the users unhappy and increases costs for techonlogy will just drive all the production further away to Taiwan, Korea and other contries. Speaking long term, the development of new tecnologies will probably move to EU with much more relaxed constraints...
boky
From the text of the bill:
SEC. 101. PROHIBITION OF CERTAIN DEVICES
(a) IN GENERAL.--It is unlawful to manufacture, import, offer to the public, provide or otherwise traffic in any interactive digital device that does not include and utilize certified security technologies that adhere to the security systems standards adopted under section 104.
:
:
:
SEC. 109. DEFINITIONS.
In this title:...
(3) INTERACTIVE DIGITAL DEVICE. -- The term "interactive digital device" means any machine, device, product, software, or technology, whether or not included with or as part of some other machine, device, product, software, or technology, that is designed, marketed or used for the primary purpose of, and that is capable of, storing, retrieving, processing, performing, transmitting, receiving, or copying information in digital form.
This is an incredibly broad definition. Let's see what kind of device is an "interactive digital device"
Computer system? Yup, it does all of the above. This is probably what they meant, but let's look a little closer.
Linux? It is software, and therefore covered by 109(3).
Memory chip? It can store, retrieve, transmit, and receive digital information. Therefore it must have implemented (in extra hardware, I would presume) the mandated DRM system.
Keyboard? It can transmit (and receive) digital information.
The special purpose digital circuit I built to support my senior project? It processes digital information, and therefore must include digital rights management.
7400 NAND gate chip? It is a device designed for the express purpose of processing digital information, as is the entire 74xx series of chips. Now a simple 20 transistor device will have to have hundreds of thousands of extra transistors to build a device to test if the bit stream the gate is processing is watermarked.
Cat 5 ethernet wire? It can transmit and recieve digital information, so by 109(3) it is an interactive digital device, and by 101(a) must therefore include whatever copy protection is
mandated.
Flashlight? I mean the kind with the signalling buttons on them. They transmit digital information, and therefore are covered by 109(3)
Paper Book? Maybe some of you out there think 109(3) means only machine-readable data storage, but even if it does, the evil hax0r technology known as 0cR can "rip" a book, and therefore the book must be protected.
Pencil? I have occasionally done math with a pencil, and therefore processed digital information.
I look around my desk and see a scanner, a GPS receiver, several CD's, a roll of labels, a checkbook, a soda can with a bar-code, a 20 sided die, my car keys, a five dollar bill, and a spoon. Of these items, only the spoon is exempt.
My own brain? It clearly processes information, and can do so in digital form, albeit mostly in decimal. The question is whether it is a "machine, device, product, software, or technology" will have to be left to the courts.
The bill, as currently written, could be applied to force digital rights management into virtually every product made by anyone.
Now is where it gets interesting. Suppose the DRM method is patented, which is not prohibited by the bill. The only thing it says about DRM licensing is that it must be on "reasonable, non-discriminatory terms." Think GIF. Since almost every device made by anyone, anywhere, will require DRM, the holder of the patent will be able to collect royalties from all of us. It will be the ultimate technology tax!
Be afraid....
Interestingly, the first US Supreme Court copyright case was also essentially an attempt by a thief to secure a monopoly - thankfully rebuked by the Court at the time - the guy was the Court's reporter and he was trying to claim that he owned the rights to Supreme Court opinions! Nice try; gotta love the audacity though....
Let's see if we can get people to call them "copy prevention" technologies. That might help in explaining to non-technical people why this Act will be such a disaster if it passes into law. "Copy protection," to me, is a little vague about who or what is being protected. Granted, this might be as successful as our attempts to distinguish "hackers" from "crackers," but I think it's worth a try.
Just another wannabe fantasy novelist...
There is no way that GPL'd software is going to be able to be security certified by the Dept. Of Commerce without massive modifications that would destroy the GPL licience. In fact ther is no way that the DOC is going to be able to decide how to certify or what to certify so it'll have to be delegated to Industry experts so you'll have Microsoft/Intel people deciding the standards for Secure hardware/software systems. /.'ers and this scares me. Anyone who has read the bill and actualy understands it and still says it's not so bad has to be either a FBI troll or on the Microsoft payroll.
Also the bill is presented as an anti-piracy thing which might be noble in principal; its vagueness in so many areas leads me to believe that its an attempt to out-law Linux and anything else that might be used that's not big company produced. Actualy I would be concidered a right wing wacko by most
Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
if only that were the case...
Nah, no point. Our film industry doesn't make enough money to make it a big lobbying point.
Besides, we just don't suck up to big money the way the average American does. Our sinister legislation usually gets proposed to give more powers to the state, not corporations. I'm not saying that's any better, mind you.
-- What do you need?
-- Gnus. Lots of Gnus.
Most of the CD's I buy are to learn a song for Karaoke, For casual listening it the radio. In short I just don't buy CD's as an adiction well unless it Karaoke and I've weened myself off that pretty much.
Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
Hi Mom,
you know you said I work too much with that Linux thing? Well, soon it will be over. They will not let me use it anymore, because they say I could use it to make illegal copies of CDs or electronic books.
No, I don't do that. Never did. But they don't care. They say they want to be sure.
Therefore, we better ask uncle Bob if he as a place for me in his shop, because I'm not sure I can keep my current work.And even if I can, I would not enjoy it anymore, since I'm not allowed to _understand_, but only to _comply_.
What can we do? Not much. Write our congressman? Maybe (BTW, did you vote last time?)
I say, why don't we stop buying Disney things (yes Mom, they are behind this).And stop watching their movies, also - yes, also the ones on free tv, we pay that by watching their ads. And you could return that ticket for DisneyWorld you bought for little Ann.
What. You _love_ disney movies? (as a matter of fact, I do, too). And what we say to little Ann, which has waited for _years_ for that ticket?
Well, then, maybe uncle Bob's shop won't be so bad.At least, I won't work so much anymore.
Ciao
----
FB
but the irony is that at least one of the consumer electronics companies, Sony, is also a major producer of "digital intellectual property" that, well, Sony is trying to "protect" (against what?).
Ooooh, I just love those cute pictures.
A question: Suppose one connects to the internet using one of those cheap 'internet appliances', like the SMC, and then has PC's of various OS's behind the firewall. Would that be illegal?
You mean, since there are many starving people in the world, i should not just be thankful but be completely satisfied with just one meal. after all that's better than much of the world.
You have more freedom than most people in the history of the world, and more freedom than most people living the world today.
that's exactly my point. America is not about the being the best anymore. it's about being 'good enough'. and simply put, 'good enough' is not good enough.
go whereever you want, do whatever you want.
next time i travel abroad with my laptop (on which i spent $3000+ of my very hard earned money) and fancy watching DVDs i buy there i will remember the freedom you mention. especially if i want to continue to be a lawful citizen. as of right now, my laptop hardware (the DVD player) tells me i can't travel more than 3 times. at least that's how many times i can switch regions. so either 1) i'm missing something. 2) i'm only expected to travel 3 times in my life. or 3) i dont' 'own' the hardware that i paid $3000 for. if it's '1' someone please educate me. if it's '2' -- there goes my 'freedom' to go where i want however many times i want. or if it's '3' someone just took my money away as a form of tax. freedom indeed.
Worship (or not worship)
I'm an athiest. or rather, i believe in humanity more than i do on something i believe to be fictitious. prez bush senior has been quoted a number of times saying that athiests are not citizens of this god loving country. you seem to know what the prez of the US of A doesn't. hmmm... maybe you better call him and let him know that there is such a thing called freedom of worship.
Those acts are not the equivalent of inventing flight. Sorry.
The whole theory of flight is based on bournelle's principle. ie. bournelle's IP by todays standards. i bet if flight was to be invented today, bournelle and his posse *wouldn't* go after wright brothers for 'hacking' on that IP.
Um, Gnutella hasn't really needed any money to florish. But anyway...
wait till it hits a critical mass and hits RIAA and MPAA's radar.
If you feel so strongly about this that you think it's worth making drastic changes in your life, devote yourself to fighting it.
That's my point. I feel strongly about it. But i'd rather fight logic, coding, computers, hacking etc.. than 'fight' politics. i'd like to think of myself as a computer scientist. i'm good at that. i'll leave politics to those that are good at it -- the politicians. i want to use 100% of my time and energy on what i'm good at thereby realizing my fullest potential. and that's the extent of my 'marketoid' speak.
Allright, as a Dutch person I could have said the same.
And because you are still wet behind the ears about things like 'polution', 'drug use', 'human rights', 'social programs', 'abortion', 'health care' and 'education for everyone' I don't freakin' care about this GDP thingy. I have more holidays then you. Hell, effectively 40 days a year. And that isn't even weird or anything.
Shut up until your prison rate is below 1 promille. That means decreasing a factor 10. Then the US is up to the worlds standards.
Mom, they're trying to pass a new law that can not only make it illegal to tape your soap opera, it would also be a Federally punishable offence.