Slashdot Mirror
SSSCA Hearing October 25th: Free Software Threatened
A story at NewsForge details the latest on the state of Senator Fritz Hollings' proposed SSSCA, which may be the most radical attempt at legislative oversight over electronic goods ever attempted in the U.S. Opposition from the Electronic Frontier Foundation, the Free Software Foundation, the Association of Computing Machinery and others notwithstanding, Hollings' efforts to impede a free market in computer hardware and software through legislative fiat has been little commented on, in part because Hollings refuses to release much information about it. Eben Moglen is quoted to good effect on the risk a bill officializing and regulating all digital devices would pose to Free software. Under the SSSCA, it would be "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." And that rules out most Free software, right from the start. (Read on for some more information.)
Besides writing your own representatives (email and faxes are probably better than phone calls), note that according to Hollings' contact page, "South Carolina residents may call, toll free, 1-800-922-8503" to reach him. In addition, the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) and the Privacy Center will be holding a meeting on "Security or Surveillance? Technology's Impact After September 11" on October 22 at Washington, DC's National Press Club; you can email for details on this meeting.
I thought this idea would go over big.
just out of curiosity, if I am at a terminal in the US, but remotely logged into a machine outside the US, does that count as exporting my code?
I hope you're not pretending to be evil while secretly being good. That would be dishonest.
I've found that Congress.org is a great site to use when looking for and trying to contact members of Congress that represent my area. Contact your representatives. We have to make a large outcry now to stop this.
Please warn me next time! I'm at work and I wasn't expecting something like that!
"Attention Citizens, 2+2 now equals 3.947547175. Please recalibrate your equipment now" --The Computer
Why would I not be surprised if Senator Hollings ends up with a fat cushy position in the RIAA or MPAA after he's done raping our free markets?
- For the complete works of Shakespeare: cat
You may want to wait until we're talking about key escrow again.. Or, conversely you could actually read the bill which has nothing to do with enabling law enforcement deal with crypto.
This bill is about crippling an entire group of industries to help another industry combat imagined losses..
Is there a -1 idiot moderation?
As an avid media and software pirate, though, I am deeply concerned that the FSF, the Slashdot community, et al, will focus too much of their attention on SSSCA, and when a more modest measure (such as CPRM) reaches Capitol Hill, the powers that be will view us as naysayers. We need to be careful not to express too much dissent for hopeless measures like the SSSCA, so that we do not stand accused of crying wolf later. Because any hinderance to the free exchange of copyrighted materials hurts us all and strikes another blow to the First Amendment.
-CT
My take on this whole bit, a work in progress.
The year is 2021; corporations run what was formerly known as the United States of America. Waking up, you log onto your computer terminal and begin your morning read of the newspaper. Browsing through "IBM Times" and "Microsoft Journal," you grow sick of the corporate propaganda riddled throughout the "pages." Wishing to view an opinion different from the standard, you attempt to veer off the normal course. Immediately, you receive a message from the local Microsoft Police Corp informing you that you've violated the law, and have been fined $200 dollars. They warn repeated offenses will have the end result of imprisonment and additional fines. Not surprised, you return to reading the "IBM Times," subjected to the regulation of a corporate controlled government. Now, in the mood to listen to your favorite old music you insert a Compact Disk into the computer, and attempt to load a small program you've written to use this old technology. Unfortunately, this CD will not play, and seconds later you hear a knock at the door.
The agent for the Recording Industry of America standing before you looks like he's done this a million times, but you don't feel so comfortable in the handcuffs he's put on you. "The computer warned you, and you didn't listen," he lectures. A "repeated offense," he continues "is grounds for imprisonment." It is no longer legal to listen to the Brittany Spears or Led Zeppelin CD you purchased 20 years ago. In addition, the mere creation of your CD player is grounds for 5 years in prison, and a $200,000 fine.
Absurd as it may sound, this reality may soon exist. This month, a bill is being brought to Congress called the Software Security Standards and Certification Act. Proposed by Senators Ted Stevens (R-Alaska) and Fritz Hollings (D-SC) and backed by many corporate lobbyists, this bill requires all software to use government approved security measures. The effects of this law are far reaching, effecting people all over the world in addition to those in this land of the free. Beginning with the mandatory government regulation of software, then through the prosecution of those who choose not to integrate this police ware into their products, and ending at a yet unknown level, the SSSCA benefits few people. A law that forces regulation inhibits civil liberties and lessens the rights of US citizens deserves to be dismissed, but unless people are informed, this bill will pass under the noses of Americans everywhere. With the intent to "benefit" the public, the law does anything but, as it will negatively impact the technology industry, programmers and anyone who uses a computer.
The stifling of innovation, a longtime defense by Microsoft in their anti-trust trial, is a major concern of those opposed to the SSSCA. Section 105 of the SSSCA states, "The Secretary shall certify technologies that adhere to the security system standards adopted. . . " Under this direction, all software must be reviewed by the Secretary of Commerce before distribution is allowed. It is at the Secretary's discrescion to determine if an application sufficiently adopts the security standard created by a private industry committee. (Section 104 b) Software often has a rapid development, with some products having new versions released multiple times a day. The requirement of review by the Commerce Department would instantly destroy this rapid release cycle. The purpose of a cycle like this is to quickly stomp out bugs in applications, and allow developers quick feedback about their applications. Unfortunately, feedback will be far from quick and the technological revolution quite visible today will cease to exist, caught up in bureaucratic processes. In addition, the private panel may use the opportunity to create a security policy to legally hinder the advancement of technology in favor of gaining market share.
Not only does the SSSCA allow for corporations to determine the new security policy, it offers them exemption from anti-trust laws in accord with section 107. In the past there have been many attempts at allowing an industry to regulate itself, such as the steel industry in the early 20th Century, and more recently, cable and telephone industries. In all instances, after a period of time, the government has stepped in and taken control of the situation, for fear that monopolistic business tactics being used by the companies involved may have led to unfair completion. In fact, a major court case is still being reviewed after 4 years of court battle. The Microsoft anti-trust case has cost taxpayers millions of dollars in the attempt to punish the company for violating government sanctions. In contrast to the stern stand the US's past stance against anti-business practices, the SSSCA allows for legal exemption from anti-trust laws under the banner of security certification discussion (Section 107 c).
In addition, George W. Bush's recent dismissal of the Microsoft breakup and the ratification of laws like the Digital Millennium Copyright Act have caused a large distrust of the government by programmers across the world and the SSSCA is enhancing that further. This fear of government holds strong in the programming community at large and has caused much concern among its more popular proponents. Reactions to the possibility of the SSSCA's ratification have ranged from vocal protest to boycotts of varying degree. Government funded research groups like those at Fermilab or NASA utilize many free softwares to cut costs and improve the quality of their work. The inability to use these applications due to either programming boycott or massive bureaucratic delay will have disastrous effects on these centers of science. The unwillingness of programmers in response to government action will only further hinder the development cycle of technology. This creates a loop of constant degradation in technology, a complete reversal of the SSSCA's supposed intent. Lower quality technology lessens a programmer's ability to perform his chosen profession. Unfortunately, the proponents of the SSSCA are not concerned with any of this.
There exists a large group of programmers known as the Open Source Community. Releasing their software free of charge, these programmers want to help others and to aid in the dissemination of information. Unfortunately for them, they are not paid and often work on their software solely in their free time. In addition, many are very attached to their products, as to many; a computer program can be a work of art. The SSSCA would require members of this community to adapt their art to the whim of a private-industry panel. To violate standards of their own decree would absolutely disgust the programmers whose goal is to aid others by making quality software. An idea proposed by those in favor of this legislation suggest standard libraries, or routines be developed by the industry-panel and government for use in software projects. While this would put the actual implementation of security in the hands of the government, programmers would still be responsible for using these libraries. Complications related to copyright and interoperability would cause many problems. A disagreement with the government in either could prevent the programmer from using the government routines under a moral or ethical standpoint, violating their right to freely voice their beliefs. Another problem exists for those who work on much smaller projects, where a government-created library might be unavailable due to either its newness or obscurity. Without the ability to use those routines, a developer would be in violation of the SSSCA if she wanted to release her application, or other software (Section 103).
In addition to inhibiting a developer from freely expressing his beliefs through an artistic medium (programming) the SSSCA would also require programmers to further monopolize their own free time and cash flow in order to integrate any certified security implementations. By adhering to the law, they agree to the terms of security set fourth by the government, and must spend their time updating software not to add new features or usability, but rather, implementing federally mandated changes. (Section 102) Although the law offers a grandfather clause to programs currently available, new releases of the software would be required to adhere to certified security standards (Section101 b). In addition to their self designated duty of helping people, open source developers would be forced into the labor of securing software all because they have the desire to help anyone who uses technology. Lastly, those with barely the skills necessary to create an application may not be able to implement security regulation into their programs, due to inexperience or lack of knowledge. This has the potential to limit further, technological advancement.
Overall, the inability of a programmer to implement security features, or the conscious decision not to, can result in numerous felony charges to be filed against him or her. In fact, even improper adherence to the standards whether intentional or accidental meet with the same punishments: monetary fines and imprisonment. With government regulation, programmers will be forced to bend to the will of ever changing standards and those who choose not to follow the regulation will be met with fierce punishment. Like many other recent technology laws, the intent will not matter, only the actions taken. In the world of technology those actions can be the exact same, only one could cause millions of dollars in damages, and the other the realization that a computer has a true security vulnerability. Enforcement of the SSSCA does nothing to protect American citizens, but the implementations of the laws have disastrous effects on most everyone, including anyone who uses technology.
First on the near-never ending list of ways the SSSCA will hurt the American public is the realization that it will cause the creation of inferior software. At first the regulation will bring to a halt the creation of some software, as it's developers will protest the passing and enforcement of the SSSCA. Quick to follow the boycotts, development testing will halt as the bureaucratic delays of the certification process delay software releases. After this, those who do not have the time to add security implementations to their application will halt development. Next, the programmers who wish to comply with the SSSCA will halt the addition of new features to their applications and instead work to comply with security standards. Finally, a halt in the open source community will begin to occur, as corporations with cash are able to bring to market applications faster than the developers who are working for free. Now the rapid, fast moving, and rapidly improving technological change will come to a HALT. Nobody benefits from a stagnant industry. As the number of new features and bug-fixes decrease so will the value of the market, as competition will be lost, and quality slashed. The efforts of open source programmers all over will be broken.
The spirit of open source will not be the only thing broken. Despite the SSSCA's purpose of improving security, a policy such as this will horribly break the security of computers and make them much more vulnerable to hackers. Consider a neighborhood where every house used the same type of lock, a type of lock with its specifications available to the public. It's easy to estimate how quickly every house in the neighborhood would be robbed. As soon as one thief figured out how to pick the lock, it would be simple to figure out the rest. Now put that into computer terms. If everyone used the exact same methods of securing their machines, methods set forth by the government, what would it mean if a vulnerability were found in the security standard. Once one is discovered, as there is no such thing as absolute security, ever machine complying with the SSSCA's provisions would be a house in that neighborhood. Easily broken into. Consider another hypothetical situation. VISA decides it does not want to violate the law so it chooses to implement the SSSCA's certified security standards on all of it's Internet accessible machines, in compliance with section 102. After this is done a vulnerability is found, unbeknownst to the company and a malicious hacker decides to exploit this vulnerability. Now he has the credit card numbers, as well as personal information of every VISA customer. VISA is responsible for the stealing of all that information, because they decided to follow the law.
The imagined world of the "IBM Times" and the "Microsoft Police" is not entirely fictional. As time passes and corporations become more involved in the lobbying of laws towards the inhibition of civil rights, those "deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed" need to be reminded that the governed do not agree with the legislation being snunk underneath the noses of the populace. One such law, the Software Security Standards and Certification Act is being presented to congress right now. Do not allow corporations take the "decent respect to the opinions of mankind" from us, the true rulers of the United States of America. Do not read the "IBM Times." Do not support the United States of America-Online/Time Warner by remaining silent or allowing others to be ignorant of the travesties being played upon us by the greedy.
Overall this looks like a nice gift to the big movie and record companies at the cost of consumers fair use and other rights. However, section 103(b) states:
PERSONAL TIME-SHIFTING COPIES CANNOT BE BLOCKED. -- No person may apply a security measure that uses a certified security technology to prevent a lawful recipient from making a personal copy for time-shifting purposes of programming at the time it is lawfully performed, on an over-the-air broadcast, non-premium cable channel, or non-premium satellite channel, by a television broadcast station (as defined in section 122(j)(5)(A) of title 17, United States Code), a cable system (as defined in section 111(f) of such title), or a satellite carrier (as defined in section 119(d)(6) of such title.)
Which is a good first step. But this arguably would let HBO or any other premium service (do other packaged channels count as premium services) prevent me from recording The Sopranos or any of their America Undercover series...
This seems like an odd thing to do. So, for example, when the Sopranos goes into syndication I'll be able to record it off of UPN but not HBO.
I'm a teacher. I use recorded materials to teach my students. I'm allowed to do so under fair use. This law could make me into a criminal. That sucks.
Buy Hex-Rated Stuff, fight the DMCA!
If I read the draft bill correctly, this would put an unfair burden on smaller hardware companies by forcing them to spend extra manpower and equipment to make their devices comply with government licensing standards... government licensing standards... that sounds like something China would do doesn't it? In any case, not only would it do that, but it virtually wipes out whatever remenants were left of fair use after the DMCA got passed. This is something which would discourage innovation and fair use and is therefore something that must be stopped at all cost. The whole concept of copyright has been totally changed into something which is overly broad and restricted and this very well could be the final blow. If this gets passed I'm leaving the US for some other country... maybe one of the Scandanavian countries. I won't live in a country that's as restricted as China.
I hope my Senators and representative gets the letter I sent them last week. But given the mail, I doubt they will. Even if they do, one of my Senators, gets money from the Hollywood lobby (#12 on the list) although to be fair, most comes from actors and actresses in the form of personal donations. At least according to Public Radio here. http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/indus.asp?C ID=N00004443&cycle=2002
and
http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/indus.asp?In d=B02
Free software is VERY important. Free software is the thing that will help close the "digital divide". It should be a way for universities to be able to lower tuition. When you don't have to pay outrageous licensing fees, you have one less thing to worry about.
The computer technology is the one area of our economy where the government has been, for the most part, hands-off. As a result, technology has improved by leaps and bounds while prices have dramatically decreased. A mere $200 today will buy a computer so powerful it would have cost $10,000 just five years ago, while other aspects of the economy--such as health care and energy--where the government meddles for our own good have seen ridiculous amounts of inflation. Legislation in this manner will, IMO, stifle progress and the trend of declining prices.
Not only that, but the law will be an unfair burden on computer owners. Consider the following clause:
(a) REMOVAL OR ALTERATION OF SECURITY. -- No person may --
(1) remove or alter any certified security technology in an interactive digital device;
This essentially forces consumers to run software they do not want, and prohibits them from removing it. There don't appear to be any exceptions for issues such as data protection. The government wants to do exactly what it's blaming Microsoft for. This is a serious and inexcusable affront to our liberties.
All in the name of "enhancing the security of the internet." Check out this quote:
There is little financial incentive for private companies to enhance the security of the Internet and other infrastructures as a whole.
How clueless can you get?
On the plus side, there is an exception for time-shifting, but this is little consolation compared to the decimation of our basic rights and the certainly negative impact it will have in the computer marketplace.
a digital device?
computers are digital devices, LCD watches are digital devices, calculators are digital devices, microwave ovens are digital devices, software is not a "device"... and even *if* it were this would have NO effect on software written places other than the USA...
Thanks to file sharing, I purchase more CDs
Thanks to the RIAA, I buy them used...
Now, with the recent threat of getting anthrax through the mail, will congressmen actually read their mail? We already know that they don't actually read email. So, now that snail mail may no longer be acknowledged, is there any way to communicate the people's wishes to congressmen?
According to the Title of the article on Newsforge, Senator Fritz Hollings (D-Disney) avoids talking about SSSCA, he's a Democrat from the state of Disney?!
When did that happen? Talk about getting your moneys worth from your lobbying efforts... Not just protected by corporate statutes, but now they can elect their own government officials!
Culture is more than commerce
Under the SSSCA, it would be "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."
Do these people have any idea how much it would cost to replace all these wonderfully vague "interactive digital devices" in order to make them compliant? Telephones, keyboards, remote controls, speakers, hearing aids, car stereos, printers, wristwatches, etc etc. What lunacy.
"All mankind is at the mercy of a handful of neurotics". - Norman Douglas
From the NewsForge column:
there's probably a better chance that the city of Berkeley, Calif., would open up a municipal rifle range before that happens
Uh Oh... We're all in trouble now... It's already happened![www.csua.berkeley.edu] Quick! Stop using Linux/*BSD, it's only a matter of time before the authorities are closing in on you...
I want to start out this comment by saying I am unalterably opposed to this legislation. If passed, this is fragment the technology industry beyond repair by either forcing manufacturers to create multiple versions of hardware, or not release devices in the USA for fear of lawsuits.
That being said...
If this law passes...IF....then I think that open source will become a cradle of freedom, but in the process, will carve the "technology haves/technology have-nots" line in stone. If this passes, we need to follow the guidelines that they give us. We need to put all the security measures in the code..right there for everyone to see. And remember, not only will they be able to see them, they will be able to edit them out, and recompile. Not that this will likely be legal...but the people writing the software won't be the ones breaking the law...it will be us. A sad, sorry state of affairs, for sure, but this law will not pass, and if it does, it will not stand for long. Any person that looks at what they are attempting knows that, while the intent is not evil, the method they are using is unconstitutional. Life as we knew it is slowly slipping away, on a dozen fronts. We're not going to win each battle, but if we keep a cool head, and look at things from the perspective of the people we are against, then we will prevail in the long run.
Check out my sysadmin blog!
in part because Hollings refuses to release much information about it.
There's a couple of things I find real fishy. First, any proposed law in Congress should have full disclosure. Second, if he's not willing to talk about it, could he be almost embarrassed oveer it? Or hiding something? Most lawmakers are proud of their proposals.
as usual, this is very USA-centric
Yes, it is. That's why it's posted under the U.S. topic. Our Congress isn't passing laws for the rest of the world. Yet.
-- dR.fuZZo
A few weeks ago in my college government class, we were assigned the task of drafting a faux constitutional amendment, and arguing our position for that amendment. I chose "Fair Use" rights and argued for the revocation of any laws drafted which violated them.
So I get up in front of the class, and it's completely filled with non-geeks. But it really only took about 5 minutes for these folks to grasp some of the basic ideas. I touched on DMCA, and why it is dangerous. I explained the two ways of owning something (physically owning it, like a car, and licensing, like software), and how the Music/movie industry seems to want it both ways. I talked about Sklyarov and the sheer ridiculousness of his "crime" and the punishment.
5 minutes later everyone in the class understood. My "amendment" passed with a unanimous vote.
In a way, Congress is a lot like my class. I'd venture that probably 75% of congress is a lot like the proverbial "mother" we wouldn't let try to install linux. And that's to be expected. A lot of them are much older than the folks who have grown up with computers, and lot of them went into careers (legal) that wouldn't require a lot of computing knowledge.
Maybe all we need is one person with some computing experience and a good persona to go and explain to Congress what's going on. Maybe I'm being a bit too idealistic here, but I have a feeling that if they just understood some of the underlying concepts, things might go a little more smoothly.
Honestly, this seems like the sort of law that will be largely ignored, that is, until a MegaCorporation want to bitchslap someone they don't like. It won't be the first time a Corporation has bought and abused a law to create their own private mafia.
Listen, Disney, you greedy sons-of-bitches: The only way you'll get Linux off my computer is to pry it out of my cold dead hard drive.
Ceci n'est pas une pipe.
Something that broad and that dangerous will never pass...
Software can be dangerous. You only have to look at the amount of safety critical systems out there to realize this.
I for one am not happy with the idea of a nuclear power station being controlled by software developed by a loose coalition of left wing students. (I am referring to Linux here).
Lets get real. Software can kill, if not developed correctly. All software developers should be licensed by the government, and any safety critical systems should be formally specified (in Z for example) to prove there are no bugs before being tested on the general populace at large.
I realise the open source zealots will disagree with me, but their unregulated sloppy work has been accepted for too long. It is time we introduced rigourous quality standards backed up by legislation with teeth.
Why should some unqualified fourteen year old 'hacker' be allowd to develop software that could put lives at risk ?
Are there any Senators or Representatives that would position themselves against such legislation?
I am continually frustrated with the process that this country takes in making laws for its citizens. This issue is not an easy one and demands discussion. However, instead of meeting and deliberating what would be the most effective solution, our elected representatives rush to a "quick fix" by proposing legislation that not only doesn't address the problem at hand but suggest solutions that infringe on our liberties. All this in an attempt to be the first kid on the block to introduce a solution. When will our elected officials realize that political issues that affect us all are NOT easy to solve and require intelligent discussion? Woodrow Wilson said, "The whole purpose of democracy is that we may hold counsel with one another, so as not to depend upon the understanding of one man."
Alas, I remain hopeful.
Malcontentedness may be the beginning of promise. - Randolph Bourne
This law will not be enforcable if you ban all public offerings of free products. You know how many people will continue to give their old x86 Minix boxen to charity? Plenty.
:)
The government wouldn't dare uniformly enforcing this law in a manner which interferes with the poor bridging yet another "social divide" like the information gap.
Meanwhile Linux and other open source products will still thrive because everyone has access to the source code, and you only need one person with the source or using a binary for the products to be a success.
Software companies' interests might as well be protected through legislation, because they're making everything else that isn't banned mandatory, right?
"Look at me, I invented the stove!" -- Ben Franklin
Computer hardware doesn't violate copyright laws; people do.
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
--Thomas Jefferson
Windows has detected that you have moved your mouse.
The system is now rebooting so that your changes will take effect.
Skivvy Niner? Email me!
HEY! Look left just ONE MORE TIME!
This law sucks, but don't condemn the effort of the government to establish an acceptable level of security. Has the open source community offered an alternative, partial security solution?
/. rightfully proposes, there is no reason why an effective security technology in any application - from the protection of a server to the anonymization of a Net user's free speech, to the protection of confidential information - need have a closed source.
Open Source, and its constituent community, has encountered many political drawbacks in fighting for a free Net of independent, sovereign boxes.
You don't have the money to buy the politicians.
You don't have the political clout to motivate votes away from this.
People, afraid of terrorism, John Ashcroft, and closed profiteers have the money and the votes.
Slashdot and its ilk, unfortunately, have not succeeded in giving free software a moral legitimacy among mainstream intellectuals.
So there is a single choice left- to redefine what open source means.
Open source technology is meant to allow individuals with technical skill to improve software and debate technical means and methods.
The software often has the same purposes as closed source software. Security is one of those purposes.
As
However, the more people have access to the code, the more compromised security technology may be.
This poses a threat to law enforcement, which must combat relatively common hacking knowledge in the society.
Sort of like the homemade anthrax appearing all over the United States and the world, the level of security that hackers encounter when they steal software and music or commit industrial espionage is relatively low-level.
The open source software development community itself must work to make finding security holes harder to master.
There are two ways of doing this. One is to license the knowledge instead of the computers - to make every student of security register and submit to constant surveillance. This is what is done with some military technology, and advanced germ warfare.
Another way is to let the government in on your knowledge - and to allow the government to support an independent agency practicing advanced, superior level of security, watching over the major U.S. systems.
Which do you prefer?
Goat sex free since 2001
'effecting' is not a word.
'Effect' is a noun.
'Affect' is a verb, as is its present tense, 'affecting'.
On the whole, I think this is a really good layman's explanation of what a gigantic crock of shit the SSSCA is, though I think CmdrTroll is right--the damned thing is too much and will never be taken seriously even by the technoweenies in congress.
Nice things are nicer than nasty ones.
The State Director had not heard of it at all. I had to spell it for him ("Sierra-Sierra-Sierra-Charlie-Alpha") and describe it. His question was "Are you sure Mr. Hollings proposed this?"
Since it is close to closing time on the East Coast, he could offer me no further assistance.
He did promise to put me in touch with the right people on Monday, though.
quis custodiet ipsos custodes - Juvenal
I'm a teacher. I use recorded materials to teach my students. I'm allowed to do so under fair use.
Errrr.... I don't think so. "Fair use" is designed for your personal use. Put it this way... it's definitely not legal for you to make copies of a text book that you happened to own and distribute that to your students.
Otherwise, everyone could just get around copyright law by claiming to be a "teacher". "Mr. Lucas, I'm not showing this Star Wars movie to all these people for profit, it's for educational purposes!"
Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
Learn to read numbnutz!
Your words :
> first off, most OSS doesn't fit the bill of
> digital device.
>
> Secondly, what is stopping you from
> implimenting AES, or whatever it is called,
> in your programs. Certainly the governments
> own standard will be certified.
>
> You are as bad as main stream media at using
> obviously inflamitory, and unsubstantiated
> conclusions in the text of a story to increase
> page hoits to increase revenues.
From the draft bill :
(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.
I object to the idea that my computer or SW must operate in the company of SW or HW not of my own choosing. This is an electronic Pearl Harbor, a binary Nazi occupation, a digital coup. So fuck you, fuck Hollings and fuck anyone else who approves of this dangerous authoritarian crap.
Pardon my language - I'm usually more civilized - but this sort of thing, even as a proposal, is flat-out intolerable.
Coniine
AFAIK, doesn't that currently rule out *all* software? I mean, your point there is rather vacant - no software currently follows it, all software could follow it. If you want to argue against this don't argue against points that are dependent on the final implementation, which is yet to be determined, argue against it on grounds based on what it currently. Once they try to determine implementation *that* is the time to make arguments on.
One problem I see is summed up by this example: you are writing your first "Hell World" I mean "Hello World" that prints to a file. Since you are "storing...information in digital form" you now have to write authentication code to go along with it. Think about the pipe command... that will have to be rewritten for all OSes (that have it) because you are "processing,...[and],transmitting... information in digital form".These are more the problems I see and the arguments I would make.
Will they then extend the definition of "digital" to any component that requires or has a power source?
What about those people who make case mods, does the neon light have to meet security standards?
If you open a gameboy advanced to install a backlight kit, will you be found guilty of modifying / bypassing a copyright circumvention method because you MAY have been attempting to access a component.
At this rate, we will have no rights left. It's bad enough WindowsXP desktop themes need to be digitally signed by microsoft, that is considered annoying. Having to digitally secure any digital device? Thats a restriction of freedom.
What about devices created by inventors in the production phase.
We are slowly, piece by piece losing our rights to exist in a free society.
This reminds me of when I watched an Episode of Sliders (damn Kari Wuhrer is h0t), in which possession of technology was illegal. At that time I thought it could never happen. After a quick glance at the article in the post, I realize this may be where our society is heading.
Yeah shitdot you will report on this one huh!
Well, the constitution is being destroyed by lots of other idiot laws you refuse to report on.
Tell the hippies to go here and use the form to e-mail, fax and write letters to their "representatives".
Tell the little lego playing kiddies to go here to learn about what is going on.
Don't get involved, don't vote Libertarian, just play with your legos and enjoy the prison your apathy has bought.
Slashdot seems to be very U.S.-centric. Do you have any plans to be more international in your scope?
Slashdot is U.S.-centric. We readily admit this, and really don't see it as a problem. Slashdot is run by Americans, after all, and the vast majority of our readership is in the U.S. We're certainly not opposed to doing more international stories, but we don't have any formal plans for making that happen. All we can really tell you is that if you're outside the U.S. and you have news, submit it, and if it looks interesting, we'll post it.
Vermifax
Logout
You know, if we could just get soft money out of the political system we probably wouldn't even have to worry about terrible legislation like the SSSCA and the DMCA. I think soft money is at the root of this whole problem. Our freedoms are simply being sold to the highest bidder which in this case just so happens to be the entertainment industry.
I certainly appreciate the effort that many of our spokesman have made in helping the Open Source movement flourish. However, I think its time they took the next step and entered into public service.
As pointed out on other threads, our congressmen don't even read the mail. Its time for us to have a voice in Congress. We need to encourage our leaders to run for public office. Lets start the Linux Torvalds for Senate Campaign.
FAX OR CALL your senators now.
with the state of the mail delivery as it is, a letter won't get through in a timely fashion. A handwritten fax will be delivered instantly, and will get you a letter in return, and possibly even make an impression.
I'm going to mark mine as Personal, and ask for a chance to speak face to face.
Today is the official begining of the end of
GPL movement....It is a movement for which has been bad for America, bad for the economy. Free Software promotes Communism, lack of security and terriorist acts. I await the day when RMS and his fanatical followers are put in prison for this red scare. Its too bad that you cannot evoke the death penality.....
Get off your high "I'm-not-American" horse, and let us who care discuss the implications of this dire policy proposal. This article apparently doesn't apply to you, so ignore it already.
-sk
re: Reedy Creek Improvement District.
However I suspect it was sarcasm as I think Disney had a hand in authoring the act.
Vermifax
Logout
SSSCA is the:
Security Systems Standards and Certification Act
The post above had:
Software Security Standards and Certification Act.
Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it should!
The problem with this is not that one is making secure devices standard. There is still the problem that all OSS systems face -- getting device drivers written for the propriety systems implementing security. Most of our current drivers today are done by volunteers and not the companies themselves. As a result, we may very well have systems that are compliant, but our favorite OS's are not because we cannot get drivers to use said devices. We have enough problems no getting up to date hardware running because of copyright deadlock.See the use of CSS.DVD is still waiting on getting legal use to that code.
If it were added to this bill that the said security algorithums were available to anyone whom requested them free of charge or for a small fee ( cost of publication most likely) we are set. Then this bill does nothing to us except we now have one extra dev device that implements the security if one chooses to use it. Make it an option in new programs so if one chooses to use it, one may. That way it can't be said that the OS is non compliant and our international friends don't have to worry about it. OSS is currently one of themost standards compliant set of OS's in existance, once we have the specs, a driver can be whipped up in no time. Most importantly after the driver is finished, we go on with our lives and ignore it. Back to making OSS the best software on the planet.
On a side note, hopefully we could get CSS termed a "security device" and then under my proposition, we could finally get hold of these drivers legally!
Is it just a coincidence or another great mystery like a death of JFK?
If programs would be read like poetry, most programmers would be Vogons.
This is a floundering effort on behalf of the regulatory bodies (and the big businesses who back those bodies, a different debate entirely) to address technology in relation to capitalism. The bill itself seems to be so confused between hardware, software, intellectual property.
The incredible advancement that we've seen in the last few years is a direct result of the lack of this kind of intervention. It's been a natural market evolution. Don't they realize that legislation such as this crushes that progress?
What a strange dichotomy between capitalism and technology: the free market promotes the technology, but the corporations behind the "free market" are against it.
Hm.
Guvegrra?
Not true.
Fair use is personal use and education (including multiple copies for students).
Fair use is other things too.
Which means that it most certainly is legal to copy selections of a textbook that you, a teacher, own, and give them to your students. In fact this is precisely the original intent of the fair use clause. If you refer to that section of the USC, you will see that there are also limitations on quantity.
Secondly, your argument fails on logical grounds. If "anyone could say they're a teacher," couldn't anyone also say, "this use is my personal use" for any conceivable use of a copyrighted work? You're citing law the way Napster (and its users) wishes it was. Please refer to pertinent legislation before dictating the law to others.
This is fucking bullshit .. honestly, after the DMCA, and this .. well, I may find myself taking to the streets within my lifetime afterall. Its getting clearer and clearer that Wells was only off by 8 or 9 years with respect to BigBrother.
/they/ want.) I can do this with music, art, wood, metal .. and I'm going to damn well keep going it with code, too.
My freedom includes being able to do whatever the fuck I want. (And for others to download and use what I make however the fuck
"Old man yells at systemd"
SSSCA Passed, Free Software Outlawed (3281 comments)
Special SSSCA Police Created (521 comments))0
Features: Why the SSSCA is a Geek's Nightmare by JonKatz (326 comments)
DMCA repealed, Intellectual Property Protection Act Allows for Private Armies (7223 comments)
Linux 2.6.0 Released, Outlawed in US. (5 comments)
Supreme Court says Fair Use was a Mistake (653 comments
Slashdot Bought Out by RIAA, Renamed IPDot: News for Intellectual Property Holders, Stuff that Matters.(error: divide by zero comments)
Former Slashdot Trolls Hunted Down and Shot (6 comments)
RIAA/MPAA form Intellectual Property Protection Army, Take Over Washington, Advance Onward. (1563 comments)
RIAA/MPAA Capture Utah, No One Cares (0 comments)
RIAA/MPAA Advance on Washington DC; Government Troops Holding Out in South.
Constitution Used as Toilet Paper by Sen. Fritz Hollings (3 comments)
This was funny when somebody first e-mailed it to me about 4 years ago.
I guess it's still funny today, but it's not original.
unless you can't afford the fee's
----- Whats wrong with this picture? http://www.revoh.org:1234/whatswrong
An extention of the thought police maybe, a knee jerk reaction resulting in control freakery probably. Very silly certainly. Typical of a military mind set that seeks to control his enemy instead of understanding him, an enemy becomes more of a challenge, if he is understood and less of an enemy. The first thing to understand is how your enemy feels, once this is achieved with accuracy, then he becomes easier to defeat or at least nullify.
I consider my computer to be an extension of my brain, ergo the people who think that they can control my computer, aught to consider wether or not they can control my brain. If I can't control my brain how on earth can they control my brain. I can't control my brain because I am my brain. Would you want me to cut my brain in half so one half could control the other half?
Peter
It's called an elephant's trunk whereas it is in fact, an elephant's nose, a nose by any other name would smell as sweet
Is it anything special? No, but the install images are not .iso images. They're .encrypted_linux images instead.
.iso files, but they cannot be used as such, based upon the EULA that is signed upon receipt of any such disks. To be used, they must be copied, 1-for-1, to another disk, and then used. This procedure is hereby referred to as "decryption". The decryption procedure also requires use of a rock from the planet Mars.
.encrypted_linux images look exactly like
It's kind of like the currency in Panama. When you get a "1 Balboa" as change, it's green on the front, black on the back, and has a picure of George Washington on it. It also says "Federal Reserve Note United States of America" on it, but it's not an American dollar, it's a Panamanian Balboa. To convert it to a dollar, trade it with someone else for a U.S. dollar. Of course, they will look exactly the same, but it's all in the principle of it.
Such decryption into iso images is only legal if you own a rock from Mars. Why Mars? Because no one owns such a rock. If you preform a decryption procedure without owning a Mars rock, you are breaking the EULA with the disk, and punishable by the DMCA.
If anyone sues us for publishing linux, we'll ask how they know what the content was on the disks. If they circumvented the Mars-rock decryption, the evidence will not be permissible in court.
This is how silly our laws have become.
Free unix account: freeshell.org
We need to focus our attention on making it difficult for corporations to donate, or contribute. Moreso, especially if it's in the direct interest of the company against the people. And maybe try to get some regulations in place that make it strict punishment for corporations to push or lobby for something that violates the constitution. A system needs to be put in place that ensures more protection for the people, not the corporatations. While money is involved, we will always know who'll win.
So the legislation states that representatives of the digital device manufacturers and representatives of copyright holders have to get together and work out the standards. Who are these representatives supposed to be, and how are they going to be selected?
I'm a copyright holder, so am I going to get to vote to select a representative? Or can I represent myself? I doubt it. They'll only allow the MPAA and RIAA and maybe a couple other token people in. So how is that supposed to represent all copyright holders? Because they sure don't have my interests in mind.
-Todd
"The details of my life are quite inconsequential..."
The sad thing is your sarcastic comments have pointed out why windows has won the userbase. Lets compare the percentage of people who are capable of making all the changes at the command line to those that aren't. I sure bet MS will miss that 5%.
On an unrelated note it is not fair to compare the win9x kernal to the nt kernal. They are vastly different beasts and you come off as being rather ignorant for not treating them as such. If you actually had the ability to use Windows 2000 proffessional without having already formed a negitive opinion of it you would realize that MS has developed probably the best desktop OS of this day and age. Of course religious fanatics seldom are capable of looking at alternate views without bias.
Oh, and my copy of Win2k has been running for the past three weeks without significant increase in system resources. Sure it would match the 1600 day uptime record of freebsd but being that it is being used as more then just a server that is of little surprise. Trying installing and running a bunch desktop software on linux and you will be rebooting far more then I.
What, did the moderator points get distributed to retarded monkeys today?
Here's a free clue: When you see something really funny posted to a mostly-unrelated Slashdot article, ask yourself, "is this a cut and paste"? Even a 10 second Google search may reveal, for example, that you are reading a spoof written by Jon Hamkins 4 years ago that is being copied without attribution by a karma whore today.
Of course, I realize I'm casting pearls before swine, explaining this. Anyone who would mod up "Trolligula" without thinking can't be the sharpest crayon in the box.
What's wrong, guys, does it hurt that badly to admit it isn't just Republicans that push to limit freedoms?
If this bill passes, it will likely cause a sudden upturn in the economy. The economic boom will be caused by people like me, spending all my money on pre-SSSCA devices and software while they are still available. Unfortunately, once supply of such devices has diminished, a recession may be in order.
-- I prefer the term "karma escort."
Classic salesman tactics.
... ok"
... and you're more likely to get something lesser, yet still much worse than what you would have got through otherwise.
"And this wonderful Quad Turbo Jet Powered Lamborghini is yours for ONLY $40000000!"
"Err well it's kind of over my budget you know"
"Ah; I understand. But you can have the key ring for ONLY $2000!"
"Hmm
Offer something completely outrageous
> Linux, like all versions of Unix, is lousy at restricting /win' could 'delete an entire mounted
> my options because at the command line virtually
> any operation can be performed with ease. (For
> example, 'rm -rf
> directory, with no popup window warnings
> whatsoever.)
This is not true unless you log in as root. You don't have to log in as root as long as you don't have to perform administration tasks. However, if you do need to administer your system and you really know what you're doing, pop-up windows are annoying.
BTW, configuring Windows in a nonstandard way is such a headache because it tends to reset all configuration. Another thing is that it randomly refuses to boot without giving the sysadmin an opportunity to fix the problem without reinstalling the whole thing.
By the way, if you don't like Linux, it doesn't mean that banning it is a good idea.
Users should have the right to choose between freedom and Big Brother...
I know this sounds a alittle stupid, but I hope they pass it.
And then I hope the geeks of the world don't back down, but get fined/arrested in droves.
Lets see what happens to the economy then.
I'm not in favor of 'unionizing', but isn't there some kind of way the geeks of the earth could organize (is the eff sufficient?) to prevent this kind of stuff?
We create the technology that enables the modern world, and here we are letting a bunch of business majors who failed first year physics (if they even took it) tell us how to do things. Its the brainless ones who always seem to be in management/government. What's wrong with us?
Aren't there enough of us who have gotten successful? Or did they all "drop out" like the Woz and others who made their money, invented a few cool things and retired..
Yes, this is a rant.
http://www.masturbateforpeace.com/
Yeah, and i bet there'll be just an assload of software once all the programmers have to get jobs as fry cooks because the beast-bearded dirty gnu hippies destroy the software industry.
One item that caught my eye in the working draft is this:
I'm not sure if this means that NIST would be directly responsible for developing the standards, but...
At least if the NIST developed (or played a role in) the standard, it would be open to all... probably better than coperate dominated creation method.
It seems it would take clear out to 2006 to really get things rolling. If it took NIST that long to develope the standard, how much longer would a 'digital device' have to be in conformity?
And it looks like there would be some grants available for research... I wonder if some OSS projects (University sponsored?) could get their hands on that... make something like BSD or Linux one of the leading edge embracers of the tech, thus ensuring that the source code was out there for all to see?
Oh do not forget that children are our hope for the future and if they are too educated they may make good desicions based on good judgement, the bad Corp's certainly do not want that, as they will want to know about politics, know what Freedom is and stands for and why the war of Independence was fought, and finally, what the Constitution really stands for.
Matt
Can't you use a digital camera to take pictures of copywrighted materials, such as books? How do you
make a camera tell the difference?
Or will they just outlaw books =)
The previous has been a secret message to my comrades.
Senator Fritz Hollings office; where stupidity is vying greed.
"The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."
Ok, this probably won't pass. Not this year. But it will come up again.
And, each time it comes up, it will seem a little less like a crazy idea. So to prevent it from becoming law, we need companies (with money) to be against it.
Which means, linux evangalism. Earlier today, I read a slashdot article where most posters claimed we had no intention of "winning" any wars. "Linux is for us, not for the masses" was what they said. WRONG! To defend it, it must be accepted on a much larger scale.
So, please, don't flame the linux evangalist posters. They have a mindset that says linux is superior to other OS's, and they're right. It's ok to be proud of such an acheivement once in a while. Let's fight stuff like SSSCA instead of fighting each other.
Free unix account: freeshell.org
How could the source possibly be open yet encrypted ?!?
GPL, for instance, says: All right... scroll back to Section 1: Seems clear enough, no?
Timeo idiotikOS et dona ferentes
Hollings wants to censor our FREE SPEECH, letter by letter.
First he'll take away our S, because it stands for Security.
Then he'll take away our C, because it stands for the Constitution.
Then he'll take away our H, just for the Hell of it, because he can.
That will leave us with nothing but our own precious bodily fluids: FREE PEE!
If you're PISSED OFF at Hollings and his Politically Incorrect Security Systems Standards and Certification bill (PISSSCA), then urinate your hot yellow opinion into a film canister, clearly label it "100% PURE CONSTITUTIONALLY PROTECTED FREE PEE", and mail a sample of your FREE PEE to:
Fritz Hollings
Washington, D.C.
125 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20510
Fritz Hollings
Charleston, S.C.
112 Custom House
200 East Bay Street
Charleston, SC 29401
Fritz Hollings
Columbia, S.C.
1835 Assembly Street
Suite 1551
Columbia, SC 29201
Fritz Hollings
Greenville, S.C.
126 Federal Building
Greenville, SC 29603
Act now to stop this menacing yellow wave of Trickle Down Censorship!
"The content industries want to make a leakproof pipe that leads from their production facility directly to the eyeball and eardrum of the consumer." -Eben Moglen, Chief Counsel for the Free Software Foundation.
Following recent stories: As we all know free progs like linux are just "hackers' toys" and according to new legislation hacking is terrorism punishable by life in prison without possibility of trial. Therefore it would only make sense to outlaw free software. Welcome to the mind of a politician.
Section 109 says "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."
Since I believe the human body is wonderful example of technology, I'm wondering if Section 101(a) means that I have to use my Microsoft IntelliFinger(tm) to interactively and digitally salute Mr. Hollings and Mr. Stevens.
That's DOCTOR Beast-Bearded Dirty Gnu Hippy to you, kiddo. I've got a PhD in Software Industry Destruction, sonny.
If this passes, I don't even want to be a sysadmin in the US anymore. How hard is it to become a citizen of Canada?
I hear Canada, the UK, France, Japan, Finland, and Australia are fighting for this legislation to go through. If successful American companies will cease to be able to compete with the rest of the world, and loose their dominant position. The USA in 2001 is collapsing, freedom until inconvenient seems to be the new motto... hackers are terrorists, secret courts handing over search warrants, laws getting 1 day debates before cutting civil liberties dramatically, self censoring media like cnn branding the ATA as all American anti-terrorism legislation, a president with less than half of the vote in an election where his brother could of helped rig the election but of course didn't, a failed drug war, a new terrorism war (with targets like online gamblers, digital vandals, and terrorist masterminds and mass murderers all falling into the same category).
Actually, could this law, if it is as described, out law all student programming. Could turning in homework that did not have appropriate security measure would be illegal. Could you would have to arrest every student and teacher in the USA for criminal conspiracy. You couldn't read a book and do exercises in the safety of your own home.
He has effectively outlawed the teaching of technology and self instruction.
The question I have is if "Offer to the public, traffic", etc means "sell" - If you give it away, is it trafficking, or offering to the public? It could be one of those things that depend on the exact legal phrasing.
"It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"
Maybe I'm going insane. I can't believe we have such inept people in congress.
Free unix account: freeshell.org
Every time a story like this comes out, up comes a chorus of "Megacorporations shall rule us all! McWorld! Save us Nader!" And everybody misses the root cause.
Are corporations out of control? Yes. Are they powerhungry? Yes. Do they collect and trade Senators like baseball cards? Yes. But the problem is not with the corps themselves. The problem is with the Government.
The only reason that corporations are buying, is the the government is selling. Corporations are allowed to exist because of the laws that have been passed in the U.S. They play by (or fail to play by) the rules that are set by the government. Microsoft, the richest company on Earth, pales in comparison to the size and scope of the U.S. Government.
If you really want change. Quit focusing on corporations themselves. Yes, their actions are immoral, indefensible, and often illegal. However, they have absolutely no rights that have not been given to them by misguided, ignorant, and overbroad legislation. You can bitch on /. all day long and it won't change a thing. Spread the message. Help others understand the issues. Grow come consensus. And vote for chrissakes, with your ballot and with your checkbook.
When a preacher says he'll move a mountain, no one believes him. When a scientist says so, noone doubts him.
If this passes, only criminals will use linux
http://saveie6.com/
Have you noticed that the hearing will happen the same day miGrosoft will launch its billionesque marketed XP noperating system ? Is this a coincidence ? Probably, but I feel it ironic.
What could be worse than that kind of legislation that aim to control the way you use information ? Are you supposed a criminal before having done anything or before having been in court ?
Men are born ignorant, not stupid; they are made stupid by education. Bertrand Russel
We have to remember that we elect these people. When we see short-signed, hair-brained, back-ass-wards bills being proposed by them, we should realize that we made a mistake by electing them, and then try not to do it again. Moreover tell your parents, kids, friends, co-workers, and anyone else who will listen not to elect them again either. Of course, the competition come election time is usually pathetic, but that's a different story.
Another thing, it seems to me that a good proportion of our population is technically illiterate. In addition, as the sampling age goes up technological illiteracy does as well. If this stands, then I'd say our Congressmen are close to the bottom of the barrel when it comes to this kind of stuff. It's unfortunate because their mostly uninformed points-of-view can have potentially disasterous effects on the future.
If the law passes, your 'digital device' may not allow you to remotely login to computers in countries that don't have compatible versions of the SSSCA.
I did everything but jump in front of a representative's car to get his attention. But they were all too preoccupied to reply even once.
"Kids, you tried your best and you failed miserably. The lesson is, never try." -- Homer Simpson
I believe analog computing advanced to the turing-complete stage. Sure, it would require a whole new computing architecture, but there's always that hidden hope.
The -8503 number (same is listed on Hollings' website) is disconnected. HOWEVER, this number:
(202)224-6121
appears to get one to an answering machine that is directly associated with the senator.
Remember, no foul language.
- First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then ???, then profit.
The people responding to you seem to miss the irony of your comment.
Broad and dangerous legislation was just passed. It's called the USA Act, and it allows the police to hold people indefinitely without filing any charges, among other "broad and dangerous" things. If you think that the USA Act is not broad and dangerous, then maybe you deserve the SSSCA.
Edith Keeler Must Die
One of the important issues with legislation like this is that it should not be addressed based on its economic impact. While that should be a consideration of the implementation of a bill like this if it passes, the bill should be fought on its legality.
Does this law violate the constitution? Does it limit something like free speech?
I think this bill is terrible, but the only way to effectively fight it is to address it in terms that might have some kind of results. Reacting to it out of sheer anger at the results is a very emotional response, but if you haven't noticed emotions are running pretty high across the country at the moment.
This bill must be addressed on its constitutionality, not its effects. You can convince someone (like your congressman) to not vote for a bill based on effects, but it doesn't seem that we have the ear of those who make such decisions at the moment. Bringing up the illegality of such a bill, if possible, is the only way I think legislation like this can be fought.
Any one have any advice on the legality of the proposed SSSCA bill (if such a thing is possible without the text of the bill available)?
zor_prime
"We all do no end of feeling, and we mistake it for thinking." -Mark Twain
The protests for Dmitry seemed to work a little. They got some reporters to report it. Is there anything similar in the works for this? Does anyone know of a Web site that I can view about organizing some people in a planned march?
My Greasemonkey scripts for Digg &
That is totally wrong, windows uses way less than what you have, one of the reasons many POWER users use linux, the fact that it gets more of it out of what you have.My linux install was 900mb, MORE than windows, and don't forget that the entire download was 1.7gb. Kernel and drivers only 750kb? It's 2001, get with the program!
So, when the IBM or Hitachi mainframe blows a disk controller, I guess the entire business system that has been running for twenty years on the big machine in the glass-walled room, will have to be dismantled and replaced with an approved MS BackOffice solution running on certified PC hardware. IBM will be prohibited from selling a replacement part, yes?
Yeah. Right.
Then think of all the old government systems that would have to be upgrade to comply. But they'll probably exempt the government, like they always do.
Edith Keeler Must Die
In a way, Congress is a lot like my class.
So who was the lobbyist in your classroom? Who was passing out the bribes^Wcampaign contributions? Who was doing the glad-handing in the Capitol foyer?
Edith Keeler Must Die
>Our Congress isn't passing laws for the rest of the world. Yet.
Helms-Burton law on Cuba. Just to name one that is perceived as extremely extraterritorial in Europe.
...
With a little research, you could find so many of these extraterritorial laws. They are not felt as extraterritorial as much as outside the country. But they ARE.
So, Linux will still be perfectly legal afterwards as long as they put in the required changes. Linux will be treated exactly as MacOS and Windows.
That being said, this bill is pure evil and we all have a duty to lobby our congresscritters to get it destroyed, with extreme prejudice. This is not an attack on Free software (free as in money, anyway), but an attack on ALL software.
Such law will eventually pass, because most of the "free" American people do not have a clue what this abomination is about. Long live the Democracy ! Long live the free America!
Fritz - Just because you don't understand technology, don't let that stop you from having an opinion about it, or sponsering legislation on it. Or, better yet, to quote the title of a Scott Adams book "When did Ignorance become a point of view ?"
Hello-
I am writing you, my representative, about the SSSCA, a bill currently in the works, sponsored by Sen. Fritz Hollings.
I wish to express my opposition to this and any other bill that attempts to restrict the use of personal computing devices and the Internet in order to protect copyright holders. Period.
I believe copyright legislation has gotten out of control. The continuing attempts to restrict or eliminate 'fair use' represent an egregious abuse of the original purpose of copyright (to encourage innovation/creativity by creating LIMITED intellectual property rights).
To date, the incredible pace of innovation and growth in the computing industry has occurred under the auspices of 'hands-off' government policy in this area. Rights-holders may employ technical means to restrict the unauthorized use of content they sell. There are no restrictions on what individuals may do with their computers. This system has fostered gains in per-worker productivity that have underpinned one of the greatest economic booms in history.
As a computer professional, I feel my very livelihood is threatened by this bill and others like it. I object to any bills that have the effect of closing down or restricting:
(1) free use of storage devices or playback software on computers
(2) free use of varied operating systems and software of any kind
(3) unmonitored use of computers connected to the Internet
Any bills along these lines will have a catastrophic effect on the pace of innovation in the computing industry. And that's bad for our society, bad for California, and bad for me personally.
I do not see anywhere in the bills that "free software will be outlawed right from the start"...
You are all assuming that any such technologies will be royalty based. If the decided upon Digital Protection Mechanisms are not royalty based then they could be implemented into the software without trouble. And if such mechanisms are hardware based then this would preclude the requirement to handle it in software.
If God gave us curiosity
Anybody know whether Microsoft has contributed to this guy's campaign fund?
If that happens, I'm moving to Canada
PS: I don't reply to ACs.
Hmm; interesting; I didn't know about the "nonprofit educational purposes" clause. Thank you for the correction.
Where is the line drawn, however? What about for-profit private universities? What about a Catholic High School? What about trade schools?
If any lawyers are reading, it would be interesting to see how this works in practice.
Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
19 OCT 2001
The Hon. Barbara Boxer
Fax 415-403-0100
Dear Senator Boxer,
I am writing to you to voice my strong opposition to the legislation that Sen. Hollings has proposed, the so-called SSSCA. I understand that there will be a hearing on 25 OCT regarding this issue.
I am one of your constituents. Perhaps a lot of large media corporations and lobbyists are as well, but we are in a country that promises government for all of the people.
I have not written to you before this, but the events of the past, such as the DMCA, have mandated this fax. Too many citizens were silent during those debates. A completely one sided solution to an emerging problem was crafted. I do not believe that you, or any Congressperson, were elected to further the business interests of large lobbying companies. Yet it seems otherwise to look at the law we have in the DMCA. Legislation crafted by special interest serves only the special interest, because it starts with that goal and may only in the best of cases be moderated sufficiently.
Corporations have a duty and responsibility to their owners. I don't fault them for asking for the best deal possible. However a government that lacks the discrimination to balance the wishes of business with the wishes of the people is not working fairly. This is not particularly easy when the lobbyists have such deep resources and the people generally don't know what is going on. We do have an opinion, and I'm sharing mine.
The SSSCA, in my view, forces the citizenry to give up many freedoms and rights that they deserve. It may be a logical consequence of the state of copyright law, but that state is so grossly out of balance with the Founders intent that it should not be used to justify this new law. Restricting freedom of information? What country is this? Let the movie and book and music owners fight piracy the best way, with fair and reasonable pricing That's fair market.
I appreciated watching your efforts to moderate the provisions of the latest security legislation on CSPAN. I would enjoy discussing the specific issues with you further, I do regret that I cannot attend the meeting next week in person.
Best Regards,
First of I'd like to say that I think this proposal reads like a joke. You could almost see it on a satirewire.com! But unfortunately this is serious.
I live in the UK, so at first you'd think I could relax. Well apart from simply caring what braindead laws get passed in the US, there is also the fact that we in the UK usually end up in one or the other with the US's laws too.
For example we have the UK saying a partial "yes" to software patents (in fact it's the worse kind of semi-yes ever - it's basically software patents only for really big companies if you read into it), and the EU implementing their own copycat DMCA aka "save the *poor* media conglomerates from the digital revolution by stamping all over consumers (not to mention free speech)".
Not only that, but as a consumer of much commerical hardware and software and free software that is made and written in the US it will effect me.
For commerical hardware and software, it means that my "made by a US company" "device" will most likely have this stuff integrated into it (even if the UK doesn't get the law), so I'm stuck with it.
For free software, if it was made illegal to write it in the US, it would drastically reduce the number of developers contributing to FS/OS projects.
Anyway... my point:
I recently started doing a CompSci degree at uni. I have been set an assignment designed to assess our general presentation skills - to do a 5 min presentation on a subject of our choice.
Well I could think of nothing better to do than to try to inform my fellow CS students about the minefields they will face as software developers (or even just as consumers) and the wrongs of the draconian "digital age" laws being proposed AND passed, including proposals like this, laws like the DMCA, and the issues and problems surrounding software patents.
What I would like is some help from fellow slashdotters, with (or links to) some information and advice on the facts and good ways to inform others about these issues.
For christ's sake, you people have a written bill of rights ! Slowly the US of A sails majestically out to sea, the name of the ship just visible in the evening light .... SS Titanic.
From a song by Tom Paxton:
Oh we're filling the bottle for Ronnie
Filling it up to the brim
And we'll never rest
Till we all pass the test
'Cause we all think so highly of him.
Oh we're filling the bottle for Ronnie
And we'll never kick up a fuss
'Cause we're only doing to that little bottle
What Ronnie's been doing to us
Urine Trouble
(c) Copyright 1986 tojo
There's information in your wee-wee
Reveals the secrets of your lifestyle
Detects if you've been smoking thai weed
On alternate Fridays in the middle of the night
(Chorus 1)
We need a sample of your yellow discharge
So go into the bathroom and fill up this jar
We'll send the sample to the boys down in the lab
Dressed in plaid,
How drab
They've got your bladder on the witness stand
The perpetrators are among us
Their numbers growing like a rampant fungus
They think their habits are private
But urinalysis will clearly deny it
(Chorus 2)
You're in Urine Trouble
You're in Urine Trouble
They've got your bladder on the witness stand
A memo from the office of the president
We must submit or he'll fire the whole darn bunch
This executive decision
Arrived at during a three martini lunch
(Chorus 1)
"Jones, I'd like to see you in my office right away!"
"Y-yes, sir!"
"Close the door behind you, Jones"
"R-right away, sir!"
"Miss Nelson, hold all my calls"
"The fellas from the lab have submitted this
It's a list of the substances in your piss
It seems your performance, while fine on the surface
Is really just a front for your deviant purpose!"
"I can't believe we made you employee of the week
When all the while you were a closet freak
You thought you could hide behind your perfect attendence
Just to conceal your drug dependence!"
(Chorus 2)
There's information in your wee-wee
Reveals the secrets of your lifestyle
Detects if you've been smoking thai weed
On alternate Fridays in the middle of the night
(Chorus 1)
"Oh No!"
"What's wrong?"
"Remember that joint I toked last month?"
"Yeah"
"I think I'm having a flashback!"
"I want to operate heavy machinery!"
"I want to cause an industrial accident!"
"I want to exercise poor judgement!"
"I want to unwisely make a critical decision!"
You're in Urine Trouble
You're in Urine Trouble
They've got your bladder on the witness stand
You're in Urine Trouble
You're in Urine Trouble
They've got your bladder on the witness stand
Take a look and feel free: http://www.PieMenu.com
Fair use began as a judicial doctrine extending the rights of copyright owners to derivative works. It currently exists as a judicial doctrine delineating the proper scope of copyright, despite mention in the US Code.
In Sony v. Universal,464 U.S. 417 (1984),
the court decided that time shifting using videotapes constituted "fair use", even though such a use is not necessarily educational. In Campbell v ACUFF-Rose 510 U.S. 569 (1993), the courts recognized the right to parody, even if done for commercial purposes. The court further noted that the fair use clauses mentioned in 17 US 107, "provide only general guidance about the sorts of copying that courts and Congress most commonly had found to be fair uses".
...from a previous dialog in which I participated on USENET regarding this issue (notice, I'm $teve, MUFTI is one of my rivals from the Left):
t tgart.de...
Joerg Scheurich aka MUFTI wrote in
message news:slrn9sdulh.n6m.rusmufti@helpdesk.rus.uni-stu
> In article , Andrea
wrote:
> > It seems to me that provisions in a new law being presented to
> > Congress from the entertainment industry called SSSCA would make
> > creating works of art and science using text based programs illegal.
>
> No. Following
>
> http://cryptome.org/sssca.htm
>
> it only makes it illegal, to distribute data without certified security
> technology.
Can you site a section? The only thing that comes close to that is Section
102 which says:
"An interactive computer service shall store and transmit with
integrity any security measure associated with certified security
technologies that is used in connection with copyrighted material or other
protected content such service transmits or stores."
My interpretation of this is that the service must preserve security
measures in the content, but only to the extent that the content contains
such measures in the first place. So, if the VRML file contains no security
measures, they are fine providing the file with no security measures.
The real heart of the bill is the prohibition agains "insecure" hardware.
This reminds me of the V-chip legislation. They required TV manufacturers
to put the stupid V-chip in the TV, but I have never heard of anybody using
the V-chip to block objectionable programs. It's just something that sits
there and adds (according to some sources) as much as $5 to the retail cost
of a TV.
So, what is likely to happen is that the same people who use formats like
WMF and RA to transmit data will continue to do so. It will be harder to
hack WMF and RA files, and it will be illegal to do so.
People who choose to use "insecure" formats like HTML and VRML will go about
business as usual. In order to really foul things up they would have to
explicitly state that using an "insecure" format implies forfeiture of IP,
thus compelling people to use "secure" formats. This bill does not do that,
and I don't think any subsequent bills are likely to do that.
> I see no reason why VRML can not be distributed via https with
> a ssl encryption.
>
> If this law will be reality in the USA, a certified ssl encryption will
> come.
Yes, they will have something certified, but the way I see it there won't be
any requirement for you to use it with VRML, HTML, or anything else.
Don't get me wrong. This is a bad law. It allocates over half a billion
dollars to do some research when an industry standard consortium probably
would have done it without wasting our taxes. You know what we will get for
the money? Probably a slightly modified version of some security software
that is already available as a free download, accompanied by a 1600-page
looseleaf bound anesthesia document.
> so long
> MUFTI
--$teve
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
"Thus, although every commercial use of copyrighted material is presumptively an unfair exploitation of the monopoly privilege that belongs to the owner of the copyright, noncommercial uses are a different matter. A challenge to a noncommercial use of a copyrighted work requires proof either that the particular use is harmful, or that if it should become widespread, it would adversely affect the potential market for the copyrighted work. Actual present harm need not be shown; such a requirement would leave the copyright holder with no defense against predictable damage. Nor is it necessary to show with certainty that future harm will result. What is necessary is a showing by a preponderance of the evidence that some meaningful likelihood of future harm exists. If the intended use is for commercial gain, that likelihood may be presumed. But if it is for a noncommercial purpose, the likelihood must be demonstrated." -- Majority opinion, Betamax ruling, U. S. Supreme Court
Copyrights, Patents, Trademarks: temporary loans from the Public Domain, not real property ("intellectual" or otherwise)
Jeezus Christ! What is the world coming to? Are we to live in a Police State in the USA?
I would ask this question: Did you do any kind of STUDY, Mr Senator, to see what kind of effect your bill would have on the computing industry as well as the rest of the US technical infrastructure?
If what I've read is true, we are in for lot of debate.
Codifex Maximus ~ In search of... a shorter sig.
SIC SEMPER TYRANNIS!
[Thus ever to tyrants!]
May justice be done! We The People will not tolerate repressions, and will fight for our freedom!
How anout Lynn Rivers, who was mentioned in the article a while back about the anti-terrorist legislation. She might take a stand, although on the cynical sie, I'm not sure how any congressperson could opose this legislation and not risk nasty reprecussions.
Can Disney allowed to make attack ads? That would be truely scary (although it's functinally no different from Disney just donating a billion dollars to the opposition candidates to anyone who dares oppose them.
I'm playing devil's advocate here a little. Something that occurred to me about this is that one way that it could be made compatible with open software is to use a Secure Audio Path (Microsoft thing) type solution: Have the audio/video data encrypted at all times except on the audio/video card. The only non-encrypted data would exist in the circuitry between the firmware decode and the analog output (or display hardware).
This could possibly allow open-source software to continue to be developed, if they released drivers for feeding encrypted data to the card, which is unlikely considering how eager (?) the OSS community is at cracking encryption algorithms (witness the MSDRM 2 story earlier). However, this would undoubtedly put an enourmous burden on hardware developers, there would surely be large licensing fees involved (does anyone know what the licensing fee for producing MSDRM-protected content is?), and if it was cracked, it would just be an absolute mess (firmware upgrades, making new firmware that could work with existing content [oh heck, just make everyone buy their old DRM-CDs again - all $2000 worth of them..]), etc, etc..
If this gets passed, could the EFF and a bunch of other tech interests have a federal court place an immediate injuction on it (within the 12 month period before the standard is implemented), for judicial review?
Two nearly identical comments ('085 and '137), with essentially the same content, even down to the same misspelling "lobbiests". Redundant?
Does it sounds like 1984, The movie, for anybody else? Or it's just me?
-=-=-=-=
I know life isn't fair, but why can't it ever be un-fair in MY favor!?
It is worse than a law requiring every driver to buy a buggy whip, even though they are driving an automobile instead of a carrige with a horse. Though just as protectionistic of obsolete business models.
The name of the bill is just another lie/misdirection (as it is with most bills). Why are you taking it seriously?
An esoteric scratched itch:
Homeworld Map Maker Tool
The SSSCA is not going to pass unamended.
Too many consumer electronics ewuipment manufacturers will oppose it.
However, the RIAA and MPAA doen't really want the SSSCA. What they want is a wort-case scenario so that their 'compromise' bill (which woudl be completely unacceptable without the threat of the SSCA) will pass unoppsed.
Please keep an eye out for the 'comprimise' bill thely'll ask for when the SSSCA gets shot down.
If J.K.R wrote Windows: Puteulanus fenestra mortalis!
Does anyone know a good source of information which summarizes where congressional representitives, executive appointees, etc. stand on these (and other) issues?
I must confess, my long term memory is what it used to be. Which is awful. When it comes time to vote, I would like to have a ready reference handy to help refresh my memory about where the candidates stand.
--Lawrence Lessig for Congress!
...but because someone crashes a plane into a building it's suddenly illegal to talk, use encryption and use free software? What the hell? If this passes, I am leaving this country SOON! (I'm 16, so you know...)
My other car is first.
I'm not sure, but it seems to me that this bill would make illegal all sales of secondhand technology (which would amount to trafficking in insecure digital equipment).
Time to sell your shares in any company that makes its living selling secondhand computers/digicams/wristwatches/cars with microprocessers in them etc.
If, on the other hand, the bill is amended so that it is legal to sell unsecured equipment secondhand, you'd want to buy, buy, buy, as few people/companies are going to want to buy anything new (mostly because all Digital Rights Management seems to render software/hardware much less effective and more prone to failure, so even a company with no interest in "stealing" copyrighted material is not going to want to use equipment with it installed).
I suspect that comments here are correct, however, and it's the subsequent compromise bill that will be the real threat.
As an Australian, this stupid law shouldn't bother me, except that our idiot government tends to follow along whatever the US does like a little puppy dog... We have our own DMCA, for example, and no constitutional right to free speech to ameliorate it.
We are about to live in a totalitarian government, controlled by the financial elite who use their corporate control to bribe our politicians, who in turn pass bills that completely destroy our freedom. Mark my words... the SSSCA is nothing. We are going to hit the big brick wall called 1984, and at the speed we're going, it's going to hurt damned fucking badly. Yet we are going to tell our politicians, knowing they're corrupt? We shall say that whatever freedom we still possess is theirs, so long as we are safe.
Wake up. They can never provide us with full safety. Besides... what's safety without freedom? Are criminals not safe inside maximum security, one room secluded confinement rooms? Timothy McVeigh was, but he sure as hell wasn't ever going to have the ability to choose, or say anything worthwhile, ever again. We are asking for this. We are asking to become prisoners. To think that all this is for the convenience of having goods and services we don't need that the corporations tell us we must have.
Anyone saying that they live in a different country, and hence are safe, is wrong. The same financial elite (the bilderbergers, the trilateral commission, and the world economic forum) are in control of your countries too; Canada, European Union, Asia.... (including Russia) we are all screwed. Ever notice how very similar bills are being presented everywhere? The governments are slowly, but surely, coming under the same rules of a global economy. Totalitarianism approaches.
Orwell said it best: "The power lies within the prolls." Good luck convincing the gullible idiots of this world that they are about to lose everything they ever desired without any form of fight. Hell... they'll hand it over gladly, and praise the 'heros' of the age.
I quit. This world is too frightening for words.
I get tired of hearing the same paranoid /. posts about campaign contributions.
/.ers probably don't like Liebermann's (one 'n' or two?) stance on censorship, you can be pretty sure that he isn't too chummy with the music/movie industry.
Yes, there are some representatives out there who are in the back pocket of certain industy PACs. Yes, that's a pretty atorcious condition.
But to listen to a typical post on slashdot, you'd think that it was so horribly corrupt that nothing gets done.
Sure, it's naive to assume that nothing like this goes on, but I doubt that the RIAA/MPAA is buds with everyone in Congress. Hell, I doubt they're buds with even half of the folks in Washington (since they seem to like Democrats a whole lot more).
Take a look at John McCain. Sure, he's not perfect (no one really is), but McCain is pretty staunch in his refusal to bow down to campaign contributions. And while a lot of
But I'd bet that neither McCain nor Liebermann know enough about the issue to make a reasonably decent guess at it.
I'm sure that there are some congressional members who are just mouthpieces for their "interests", which is exactly why a scenario like this would help. The other representatives aren't saying, "This is just some crackpot idea he's pushing for his interests", they're using their limited knowledge of AOL (which they think is the internet) to augment the debate, and they're thinking, "Hey, that sounds like a reasonable idea".
Like I said: 5 minutes.
I think Hollings is motivated by venality and lust for power, like most legislators. But this legislation represents another step in the continuing extension of state power by making crimes of common activities. For example, the continuing legislative attack on the tens of millions of Americans who have listened to an MP3 file without paying for it. Next comes the expression of original thought, especially if it means that you distribute it by any but government-approved and -regulated channels. The SSSCA takes us another mile or two along that road.
Unlike some other posters, I think that it is important to make a big stink about this. Too much bad legislation has already been passed with little or no debate. Consider the draconian, repressive Ashcroft Laws that slid through Congress with only token deliberation. This means that there is no responsible legislative oversight at present, and our so-called representatives need to be stirred from their greed and apathy. I'm not at all optimistic that this is possible yet in the current climate of wartime hysteria. A lot of hidden agendas will slip through before even "normal," weak accountability is restored.
Perhaps we should be thinking of a plan for how to roll back these restrictions after the present war is over?
Get your teeth into a small slice: the cake of liberty
If I'm reading that right, it would make it illegal for HBO to use any security measure that prevented you from time-shifting (recording) any material you were entitled to receive.
The Mickey Mouse state.
First the election?, and now this.
"Copying information will NEVER be stealing. "
[Stealing]
1. To take and carry away, feloniously; to take without right or leave, and with intent to keep wrongfully; as, to steal the personal goods of another.
You will note that it makes no difference as to either the author keeping the original or not.
Bend it any way you please. The wrongness of stealing goes beyong government law and gets into 'social','ethical,and 'moral' law. And it does indeed have detrimental effects. First for those who obey the law, and then those who break it. "Copy" all you want now. Just pray that the well never runs dry, because the "selfish" have killed the incentive to produce what ultimately is a 'want' item.
Nice security boys...
[header] S:\WPSHR\LEGGNSL\XYWRITE\COMMS\COPYRITE.5A
--
There's a big problem with 103(b).
The language, read strictly, allows for a personal copy "for time-shifting purposes".
First, it's restricted to only non-premium content. This is becoming restricted to less and less programming of interest, and may even exclude a large number of event broadcasts: concerts, sports events, and the like.
Second, "time-shifting", read literally, could be construed to mean "record at time T, replay at time T+n". That is: you're allowed to delay playback. Once.
It's possible that restrictions might not be this severe. The content originator might deign to allow multiple playbacks, to some limit, or multiple pauses, to some limit. You might be allowed to skip over advertising, or you might not. However, the choice isn't yours, its with the content originator.
Third, the playback hardware and software would all contain "rights management" (read that as: they're managing to restrict your rights) systems, to the extent that any actions you might want to perform on the programming are going to be passed through a mediation process by the system. You ask for a playback, a pause, a replay. If the system feels that you're allowed to do this, you're granted it. If not, you're not.
And any attempt to bypass this system would be a violation of federal law.
Tell that to your beer-drinking buddies or social circle.
What part of "gestalt" don't you understand?
"Everything is adjustable, provided you have the right tools"
Fair use" is designed for your personal use.
So what happens with corporate entities, who could make huge numbers of copies whilst it still being for use of one "person".
Ok, so what kind of devices? What about systems that are not traditionally equiped with copy protection measures? IE - grep, notepad, paint, dial up networking, date, clock, fdisk, chmod, df, du, echo, cat, |, make....oh and don't forget '>'!!!
Ok, so we can argue that there are no protection measures for those systems and so you would not be required to implement them....how about if I MAKE one??
I have decided that the date command needs copy protection measures of some sort and I have come up with a licence that is not unfairly selective about who could implement it - you are free to do so if you send me $.05 for every person whom you distribute that software to and you sign this NDA....not that much to you really.
I have used what I call the "3rd bit toggle" scheme which I recently patented as #5612349801-B. I also recently copyrighted all imaginal combinations of letters and numbers that you could use to represent a date from 5/12/02 to 9/30/54 and intend on protecting my legitamate rights to those alpha-numeric sequences.
Seems perfectly logical and legitamate to me...I don't see the problem here. What are you guys bitching about? Am I missing something? I mean isn't a measly $.05 worth the security of knowing that the time you get is the real time and not some pirated copy?
So, I got the date command....who wants ls? If any command is begging copy protection measures it is that command....er I mean "device".
jik-
Just imagine if I really DID own the patent for the "3rd bit toggle" copy protection scheme (is that far fetched? I can't tell anymore...) and actually DID copyright all representation of those dates.....
:P
I could charge a fee for implementation of the 3rd bit toggle scheme and require that it be imbedded in ANYTHING that could be used to copy a date from one place to another.......course some of these require a questionable definition of "copying" but nothing much more outrageous from what we have seen recently
Scanner software - the paper might have a date on it...the representation of that date is MINE, can't copy it!
Callenders - it is reading the CMOS date and copying it on the screen....
Printer software - it might be used to print a date
Spreadsheet devices - someone might copy a date into a spreadsheet
Wordprocessing devices - pirates might want to put dates on their documents...
Web server software - sometimes black hat admins put dates in error codes which they send to all their buddies who look at their broken web pages...
Any sort of logging mechanism - they copy my dates in their log files....come up with your own dates you theiving PIRATES!
Digital cameras - they usually associate dates with the pictures...
Filesystem - date stamp directory listings...
Oh - and I wasn't even considering the obvious...digital watches, the ones with numbers, not the ones with arms - I am registering copyrights on those tomarro....(Yes, many are now digital devices that look like analog date copiers)
VCRs - they have clocks in them...
TVs - see above...
Radios - see above...
Coffee pots - many have clocks in them...
Microwaves - clocks...
Stoves - clocks....
Fax machines - digital time devices
Bread bakers - CLOCKS!
Rice cookers - CLOCKS!
Bombs - though I doubt I will have much luck enforcing THAT one...but some of those are digital devices that have copies of a certain date and time in them - until of course that date and time...mercury switches and snare triggers are ok though...
jik-
If you live in South Carolina, you are going to vote for him. You are not going to vote for the right wing bible thumping oil drilling tax cutting abortion clinic bombing Microsoft coddling racial profiling drug warrior Republican running against him. There may be a third party candidate who represents your views perfectly, but you will not vote for him either because everyone knows that only losers and dorks vote third party. You do not want to be a loser or a dork. And you would never dream of staying home on election day because voting is your civic duty. You know that because Hollings' big media campaign donors tell you so on TV.
It doesn't matter how many times Hollings violates your rights, or your anus. You will bend over and take it as you always have, and be at the polls, early in the morning all bright eyed and bushy tailed on election day, ready to check the box that says Ernest F. Hollings, Democrat for U.S. Senate.
You know it, I know it, and most importantly, he knows it. So just shut up and sit down.
You can thank disney for that...
I mean, what country can be so stupid as to make the jesters decide how information should be processed????
...not free beer.
Thats the difference between libre and gratis...
See freedom (libre) is not free (gratis), you have to buy it. You would understand this if you spoke french like us Americans.
jik-
The doomsday scenario isnt very applicable.If things become too bad,ppl in US can emigrate.Yes thats right get outta there to scandinavia,austarlia whatever.
Do you thing after a certain point Joe schumk wouldn't notice and do something abt his/her dwindling rights?
Wanted : A Signature.
Once it get passsed in US, THEY(US+company who benefits from it) tries to make other countries to adopts same, if not similar, regulation using every means including threatning(especially trade related), money, fist, etc., in the name of "Fair Trade", "Intellectual property". And those who are helpless in any of these means follows the words of them eventually(and there are many, including my country). Not that I hate US(on the other side, I post this message to /. using PC-wouldn't be available this soon without US=), but your country has far more influential on this earth than you think.
Sorry but last time I checked this wasn't going to happen in our universe! But hey maybe it'll be based on DRM2 (slashdot).
.sig
"Senator Hollings, I'm afraid you have to come with us."
"What's this all about?"
"Your pacemaker sir, several people at the RIAA have complained that it doesn't meet SSSCA security standards. They're worried that you might try to use it to illegally copy MP3 files. It will have to be removed. "
Despite what it seems most us citizens think, there are more of the world than the United States of America.
A such ban will be a temporary setback, but the world will come back, this time without usa. And it will be their loss, not ours.
Give me a break, I almost choked on my breakfast!
Tell me, why the hell won't you people do anything about it? Just sitting there and protesting won't help! Write to the people, go visit them personnally. Get some influental people behind you. Let the masses know what's up.
And remember that you can't win big money in their game. Tweak the rules and change the playing field.
But I'm not doing any of these. Why? I'm from Europe, and as such I don't have to. If the USA intends to shoot itself in the foot, I couldn't care less, but would still speak out because I do think it is shooting itself in the foot.
THis is a clear example of money and organization and lobbyists influencing the U.S. government policy on a particular subject.
The RIAA is trying very hard to close a loophole. And at the same time protect their control over what kind of music that gets made and played.
What did you expect?!
I don't think they can, but they are certainly going to try and outlaw people making CD copies of music.
This is obviously a scam: Hollings gets this law in. As soon as it passes, there will be panic.. people will run out into the streets to buy every last bit of un-copy-protected hardware they can find. The electronics/computing industry will make a killing, Hollings shares will go up. Your country will just loose another freedom, bush will then say "We are the most free country in the world" Everyone else will laugh at you. And then cry as Europe follows with its own SSSCA. Meanwhile, some hippies will take back Afganistan and drive out the Taliban. And Afganistan will be the most free country in the world. I will move to afganistan.. The end.
This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
[Stealing]
1. To take and carry away, feloniously; to take without right or leave, and with intent to keep wrongfully; as, to steal the personal goods of another.
You will note that it makes no difference as to either the author keeping the original or not.
Of course it does. If he still has it then you haven't taken it.
Bend it any way you please. The wrongness of stealing goes beyong government law and gets into 'social','ethical,and 'moral' law. And it does indeed have detrimental effects. First for those who obey the law, and then those who break it. "Copy" all you want now. Just pray that the well never runs dry, because the "selfish" have killed the incentive to produce what ultimately is a 'want' item.
You are correct in saying that the fact that it is not stealing has no effect either on whether it is moral or on whether it is desirable, and of course vice versa.
For that very reason it's better to forget the attempt to manipulate through language and concentrate on what your actual point is. If I go round to your house and smash all the windows for no good reason then I've done something illegal, undesirable and unethical. You don't have to pretend that I've stolen your windows to make that point. Breach of copyright is not stealing, or murder or kidnapping. Focus on what your actual objections to it are and you'll get further than you will by trying to redefine "steal".
if you think for one minute your going to win without a real visible protest forget it. 1. stop buying music and make it known why your not giving your money to them (music industry) because of these proposed and passed laws. 2. stop going to the MoVIES and let people know why your boycotting because of these same laws. now if you can`t or won`t commit yourself to unite for your freedom and rights do you think just by posting your feelings here at /. and contacting your congressmen or senator is gonna be enough?
look people you have to take your desent to the streets so the average joe can see and here your view points by printing up posters and flyers and
handing them out and putting them up for people to read. i don`t think that the online community or the linux users are banned together as a BODY or org. to fight back. until you people have had enough of this it`s going to get worse not better. why?, because you don`t have an organization (funds) to help get your viewpoints out. has anyone placed a full page ad in a national newspaper? has anyone seen a billboard along the road or highway telling people what`s going on? has anyone emailed or snail mailed Bill O`rielly and told him how you feel? have you contacted any TV newsstations or called a talk radio station? how many websites are dedicated to the fight for this and EVERYONE knows about them including AOL users? the boycotting of buying music and going to the movies should have an effect like the boston tea party. unless you get national(or world) attention who`s going to give you the time of day or even take you serious? where is a credible place that people can donate time and money for this cause? if every computer user in the world who could donate 1-10 dollars a month to a REAL computer advocate organization dedicated for the rights of users, then we could have a fighting chance. just think 1-20 million users giving 1 dollar or more a month... now that is power!!! well... i got to get up now cause it`s just a dream.
am i the only one that sees the irony.... so many people who hang on this site, and linux users in general, were glad to see microsofts competitors use the govt to do what they couldnt do in the business field.
i read time and time again how the govt should shut down microsoft, and now the govt seems to be trying to shut down linux
well, if thats not enuf to cure you of thinking the govt is your friend, just cause it seemed to come down on your side one time, i don't know what is
of course, you can just keep telling yourself that like, it was ok the first time, but this time, its like wrong, cause we are the underdog
but compared to the govt, when its really gunning for you, everybody is the underdog, even a big ass company like MS
Isn't the 25th the XP launch date? Lots of fronts for open source fighting on that day.
Various ramblings
I live in the UK, so at first you might think I could relax. Well apart from simply caring about what laws get passed in the US, there is also the fact that we in the UK usually end up in one way or the other with many of the US's laws too.
For example we have the EU implementing their own copycat DMCA, specifically the clause that makes circumventing copy prevention measures illegal. And we also have the UK saying a partial "yes" to software patents. It is quite likely that the UK (or the EU) could end up passing laws like this, even if the US doesn't pass it.
But more important than that, as a user of much free software *and* commerical hardware and software that is made and written in the US it will effect me if passed.
For commerical hardware and software, it means that my "made by a US company" device (be it hardware or software) will most likely have this stuff integrated into it (even if the UK doesn't get the law), so I'm stuck with it.
Even worse, if it was made illegal to write free software (or even just made more difficult) in the US, it would drastically reduce the number of developers contributing to FS/OS projects worldwide. It could kill good distributions like Red Hat based in the US, and stiffle work on any projects with have a significant number of US based developers. Hell even Linus lives in the US (though he'd probably leave).
The proposal almost reads like a joke. You could almost see it on a satirewire.com! But unfortunately it is serious.
On another point:
I recently started doing a CompSci degree at uni. I have been set an assignment designed to assess our general presentation skills - to do a 5 min presentation on a subject of our choice.
I would like to do a presentation to try to inform my fellow CS students about the minefields they will face as software developers (or even just as consumers) and the wrongs of the draconian "digital age" laws being proposed AND (unfortunately) passed, including proposals like the SSSCA, laws like the DMCA, and the issues and problems surrounding software patents.
What I would like is some help from fellow slashdotters, with (or links to) some information and advice on the facts and good ways to inform others about these issues.
I live in the UK, so at first you might think I could relax. Well apart from simply caring about what laws get passed in the US, there is also the fact that we in the UK usually end up in one way or the other with many of the US's laws too.
For example we have the EU implementing their own copycat DMCA, specifically the clause that makes circumventing copy prevention measures illegal. And we also have the UK saying a partial "yes" to software patents. It is quite likely that the UK (or the EU) could end up passing laws like this, even if the US doesn't pass it.
But more important than that, as a user of much free software *and* commerical hardware and software that is made and written in the US it will effect me if passed.
For commerical hardware and software, it means that my "made by a US company" device (be it hardware or software) will most likely have this stuff integrated into it (even if the UK doesn't get the law), so I'm stuck with it.
Even worse, if it was made illegal to write free software (or even just made more difficult) in the US, it would drastically reduce the number of developers contributing to FS/OS projects worldwide. It could kill good distributions like Red Hat based in the US, and stiffle work on any projects with have a significant number of US based developers. Hell even Linus lives in the US (though he'd probably leave).
The proposal almost reads like a joke. You could almost see it on a satirewire.com! But, unfortunately this is serious.
On another point:
I recently started doing a CompSci degree at uni. I have been set an assignment designed to assess our general presentation skills - to do a 5 min presentation on a subject of our choice.
I would like to do a presentation to try to inform my fellow CS students about the minefields they will face as software developers (or even just as consumers) and the wrongs of the draconian "digital age" laws being proposed AND (unfortunately) passed, including proposals like the SSSCA, laws like the DMCA, and the issues and problems surrounding software patents.
What I would like is some help from fellow slashdotters, with (or links to) some information and advice on the facts and good ways to inform others about these issues.
Obviously satan's influence runs deep into the state of South Carolina. How else would the state be responsible for the creation of two of the mose evil legislators on earth (Jesse Helms and Fritz Hollins). There's a reason why there aren't computers in South Carolina (Fritz's fault). There's also a reason why there aren't any artists in South Carolina (Jesse's fault - he has tried to kill the NEA over and over).
We need to send these bucktoothed hillbillies back to the caves that they came from. They shouldn't be in congress.
testing please ignore.
:-)
This post shouldn't work due to a bug. If it is actually posted, please ignore it.
COST OF ENFORCEMMENT
Lets repeat that...
COST OF ENFOIRCEMENT.
Go ahead and deride it for all its purposes and failings but by repeatedly mentioning the black-market this would create and the totally unbounded cost of trying to enforce this provision makes it emminently defeatable.
Just keep asking them where the mony is going to come from to pay to arrest and prosicute every single guy with a copy of Visual C++/Basic/Java and the ability to use same.
Go for the money, it's the only hope.
Innocent people shouldn't be forced to pay for inferior software development.
--"Code Complete" Microsoft Press
This is pretty far-fetched, so excuse me if this doesn't make any sense.
I roughly understand from the comments that this law only applies to digital devices. So if I were to build an analog device which does not implement the security measures, this would not be a problem? What exactly is the boundary between analog and digital? If I used a base-65536 digital device (using 65536-based digits, thus using 65536 different voltages to represent different digit values), is that still a digital device? Even if all numbers are 1-digit numbers? What's the difference between such a device that and an analog device with about the same precision?
Warranty Card on Purchased Government Offcial. "Dear Special Interest, Congratulations on the purchase of your genuine Government Official[tm]..."
well as an Australian and as those from India and elsewhere where thriving and growing IT industries are emerging, we think this is great! So you US citizens better get you $H!t together because your going to be out of the race when it comes to innovation in the future - its an ill wind that blows nobody good.
Under the SSSCA this line must be added to all code: #include doj.h;
Joe: I'm out again. Boy, the world sure looks different. There's hardly anything fun to do since they made computing illegal. It's all gone. Wait I've got it, I'll be sullen and withdrawn. I'll dwindle off into the twilight realm of my own secret thoughts. I'll swap files with all my anonymous ESP buddys and jam to those imaginary tunes.
Insert the sounds of a modem connecting.
I'll frag all those bad guys on my ethereal connection and pay my monthly service fee.
Insert the sounds of an imaginary Quake III session.
I'll use my cell phone to buy a Coke and head on to the unemployment office.
Insert sounds of popping a coke can top and the beeps of a Nokia.
Central Scrutinizer: Poor Joe. He continue's to believe that he is really free to control his destiny, to use what he buys in anyway he chooses, to compute freely. The white zone is for loading and unloading only. If you gotta load or unload, go to the white zone.
Thanks Frank! Your vision still holds true today, more so than ever!