Slashdot Mirror
Tech Heavyweights and the SSSCA
Keith Russell writes: "Looks like Sen. Hollings' uphill climb just got a little bit steeper. The Computer Systems Policy Project, a trade group which includes IBM, Microsoft, Intel, Compaq, Dell, and Motorola, has officially stated their opposition to the SSSCA, calling it "an unwarranted intrusion by the government." The ZDNet article also indicates that Big Media isn't quite behind it themselves. Disney's support is well-documented, and Fox seems to like it, but AOL Time Warner and the MPAA, while keen to the idea, don't like this bill in particular." Read the entire article - not supporting this proposal "in its current form" is not very strong opposition.
..how they can honestly expect to be able to force people using only Free software (like the Debian distro) to run/not run certain software. Surely this will require a change in several laws (including the First Amendment)? Can anyone please explain how this bill will affect Free software users?
At last there is some real opposition to SSSCA, us simple geeks can't fight this war alone...
If you're a USA citizen, you might try emailing your congressional representatives with your opinions. Snail mail used to be considered more valuable, but recently Congress staff members have been encouraging email use.
Wow, Slashdot opposes it, And now Microsoft does too?
The two Probably oppose it for entirely different reasons, but Politics sure do make for strange bedfellows....
Where are we going, and why am I in this handbasket?
This is definately an important issue for all slashdotters. If the federal government can step in an enforce this kind of ruling, the domino's will fall my friends. These types of steps are simply Uncle Sam dangling his feet in the waters of intrusive actions, and if allowed to go forth, he will dive right in.
I wouldn't put it past Hollings to try to slip this through as an amendment to antiterror legislation. RIAA has already tried this.
InstaPundit! Ahead of the Curve Since 30 Minutes Ago
From the article:
This legislation would be an unwarranted intrusion by the government into the commercial marketplace," said Ken Kay, executive director of the Computer Systems Policy Project, a trade group that includes IBM, Intel, Dell Computer, Motorola and others as members. "This would freeze technology...(and) force government to pick winners and losers".
As much as big corporations like to protect their IP, corporations also resent the government telling them what to do. So this puts up an interesting question: What do big corporatons want more, IP protection, or free market enterprise and development?
Whether this bill passes or not will likely show which is the winner.
If I weren't nailed to the penis, I'd be pushing up the daisies!
Once a standard is reached how long would it be before the manufacturers start supporting the proposition, especially in a bad economy with a sales slump for traditional "luxury" items?
Doesn't standards decrease cost over the long term? I get the impression hardware manufacturer's main gripes boil down to:
1. Additional cost to implement SSSCA into their products.
2. SSSCA provisions limiting future product design.
Make no mistake, I am against SSSCA, but if Sony can make money from CD and DVD players, why not be able to make money from these hypothetical devices?
Copy protected devices (DVD/ e-nbook readers, MiniDisc) seem to be the trend anyway. Especially as the content creators become content distributors.
I'm not surprised that software companies would be opposed to this, it means that the government is mandating specific features that must go in to their software, as well as a feature that would probably end up losing them many customers.
--SumDeusExMachina (Slashdot ipid ban refugee)
At least the media companies are being told that they are NOT the only game in town.
"It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"
when /. and Msft are both against it!!
try { do() || do_not(); } catch (JediException err) { yoda(err); }
Who read the article and saw " protection proposal being backed by Walt Disney and Sen. Ernest Hollings, D-S. C.
" and parsed it as "Disney-South Carolina"?
"The movie, music and technology industries have been trying for years, with only limited success, to agree on a standard way of protecting content from Internet and other digital piracy. A high-profile effort dubbed the Secure Digital Music Initiative (SDMI), intended to be a private sector version of the kind of technology effort Hollings' plan outlines, collapsed largely because of disagreements between technology and content companies. "
...and because it turned out to be so easy to crack SDMI, despite their claims to the contrary. Oops...
"Hollings' plan would restart this process, this time with the force of law behind it, and apply it to all digital devices. "
Can't do it with technology? Buy a law instead. That's how the DMCA happened. You can't stop people by adding more pickable locks, so they chose to make it illegal to pick a lock, to own picks in the first place, and even to discuss how to pick locks with your buddies. Overkill, but that's how government works.
"The early draft bill would require the technology industry to come to its own decision on a copy-protection standard within 18 months, or else have the government step in to mandate a solution. "
There's a scary thought: When the private sector fails to come up with an uncrackable system, the government will step in and have a go.
"The bill would bar the sale of any "interactive digital device" that did not have the anti-piracy technology built in. It would also be illegal to remove or disable the security technology as well as to remove the piracy protections from a song, movie or other piece of content. "
And the government's solution, as I said, is to ignore the fact that they can't make it uncrackable from a technology point-of-view, and to just say, "Illegal!" every time someone tries to crack it. The idea of working with consumers to come up with a balance that can work for everyone, as with traditional "fair use" provisions, never seems to occur to them.
________________
Private Essayist
Interesting to see AOL/TW siding, sort of, with tech. Apparently that's where most of the profits are.
Best Slashdot Co
Intel, IBM, Microsoft and Compaq Computer held a coming-out press conference Monday to oppose
a broad copyright protection proposal being backed by Walt Disney and Sen. Ernest Hollings Wow, maybe they realize this'll be bad for business? I mean to the average consumer, nobody will really care, they'll see it as being just another development or something. But most
The bill would bar the sale of any "interactive digital device" that did not have the anti-piracy
technology built in I don't think most people realize what that means, and i think that's what these companies need to do. They have the money, now start advertising. Make sure people know how restrictive this is. I know somebody said this in a discussion yesterday, but oh well. Show a cartoon of a kid trying to print a picture for school and being taken to prison and being abused there. Finally, there's some compainies opposing this, at least a little bit!
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&o
All the parties except for the consumers, right?
don't get me wrong, I'm all against this sort of standardization and regulation, but at least this way there'll be a standard copy protection to break that won't(shouldn't) be lossy as compared to macrovision encodings which can cause picture(and now sound) quality to suffer on some hardware.
Pat
Humans are slow, innaccurate, and brilliant; computers are fast, acurrate, and dumb; together they are unbeatable
Am I the only one who wishes anthrax could be inserted into the toothpaste used by Jack Valenti and his merry band of schmucks?
Apparently Sen. Hollings was to have a hearing this week on the bill. Well Internet Daily reports that due to all the "general confusion" and some of this opposition, he will delay the hearing and won't introduce until he has "dialog" with affected industries. I have heard from second hand sources that even the BSA (not Boy Scouts) are not keen with this bill. Seems like it could DOA, or even pre arrival. But as always, keep vigilant!
Even big companies know this bill is stupid.
:-))
I'm sitting at my desk, doing my job (being a productive engineer) to the benefit of my company and my country's economy. Society benefits greatly through technological progress made by the thousands of people like me all around the world. Let's have a look at what "Interactive Digital Devices" I'm using, which I might soon be unable to use.
1. My PC, on which I'm writing this. It has a variety of uses which we're all familiar with. It runs a variety of software -- free, proprietary, open source, closed course, stuff I've written myself too. Without it, my job would be impossible.
2. My telephone. This is quite high-tech for a phone. I interact with it, and it's full of digital circuitry.
3. The development platform which I'm working on. This contains digital signal processors, FPGAs, CPLDs, PROMS, RAM, glue logic, and various buttons, switches, LED readouts and so on. It's really a cut-down version of a product which my company ships. Interacting with one of these is the only way to get any work done round here. It connects to my PC via a JTAG in-circuit emulation box, which is also mildly interactive.
4. A small "performance monitor" board, which I've been developing and testing. This connects to my development platform, and produces analogue outputs based on digital inputs. (I'm trying not to give too much away here.
5. A digital oscilloscope. This is displaying traces from the hardware on my desk. Often, I screen-grab these traces onto a disk (in a standard graphics format).
6. A data transmission analyser. This box outputs digital test patterns, and monitors its inputs for the purposes of bit error rate measurement. I can set it up to do a variety of things, to verify the design of the hardware I'm helping to create.
If the UK were to pass a law like the SSSCA, it would put my company out of business for two reasons - the engineers would be unable to work because their tools would be illegal, and in any case the product we create (wireless telecoms equipment, UMTS Node-B) would also be illegal until the 3GPP mandated spread-spectrum radio standards were updated to include this copy protection/DRM/PITA standard.
I rest my case. Passing the SSSCA would, I think, bring the digital revolution to an ugly and unceremonious end.
These sigs are more interesting tha
Odds are that there is another bill lurking around somewhere which has 83.67% of the provisions of the original. The "bad bill" will be killed publicly, then the 2nd bill will be slipped through in a stealth mode.
sPh
It's good to know that their memories aren't so short that they've forgotten the furor over the CPRM.
Thankfully, this bill isn't masquerading as an anti-terrorism/anti-pedophile bill but rather being seen for the anti-consumer bill that it really is.
Easy does it!
This comment has been submitted already, 276865 hours , 59 minutes ago. No need to try again.
If shit like this is put in computers, will the computer still feel like a universal tool? There is of course a limit when a computer is to restricted to feel like a computer. Most geeks here appreciate computers because they are so flexible.
Hopefully, there will always be a quite large demand for computers like they are today. And even though most people might buy "computers" that are more like a Nintendo with WWW/email/DVD/office, for scientific uses and in the industry, truly flexible and programmable computers will be needed.
Or whatever beings or forces of nature you want to thank that the self-interests of major companies and industries are seldom in line with each other. For as long as there's a solid business reason for one industry or company to oppose the actions or legal efforts of another industry or company, those of us who always get caught in the middle will have a chance to survive and maybe even prosper, however we individually understand prospering.
Maybe we'll get really lucky and have Sony Entertainment and Sony Electronics on the opposite sides of another lawsuit. That's always fun.
Go Microsoft go!!!
The nice thing about standards is that there are so many to choose from. - ast
> definition most of ./ likes?
/. easily :-)
I cannot type
But most /. readers (me included) would avoid anyone who does back this bill.
You really think that's a significant number? VA Linux wouldn't be in its death throes if it was.
Given the current threat of recession, I can imagine how Congress would feel about adopting something like SSSCA if there was a credible threat to boycott SSSCA-compatible products. Many in Congress remember the "Luxury Tax", and how it nearly bankrupted the recreational boating and civil aviation manufacturers. That was not a boycott per se, but the effect was the same.
In this case, a boycott would surely impact the hardware manufacturers and Microsoft. Even without SSSCA, Q4 2001 is not going to be all that good for these companies.
Businesses will continue to buy computers and software, but the Dells and Gateways of the world will scream loudly if Congress makes a mess of the home market.
the big media corporations are all on unfamiliar ground, and they've had several years to catch up with the current state of technology. well, they haven't. they haven't because the state of technology has rendered them obsolete, and thus they must try to hang on as best they can.
they tried to restrict media distribution via encryption, and it failed as it was destined to do; it's theoretically impossible to devise a truly secure media distribution format. if YOU can read it, the guy sitting NEXT to you can, too. since that failed, their only option is legislation.
i don't condone it. it's evil. but the media companies are trying to survive the paradigm shift in content distribution that the internet has started. corporations are considered people under the law; like people, they're just trying to survive as best they can, and they'll do whatever it takes. thus, if they can get legislation passed that lets them live, they'll do anything they can to ensure it gets passed.
everyone keeps suggesting that media companies "revise their traditional methods of distribution". how are they supposed to do that? either you give the media away for free, or you restrict distribution any way you can. there's no room in Scott McCloud's pass-the-hat paradise for media companies.
so, the big question is: if YOU were a major media corporation's CEO, and YOUR family's livelihood depended on keeping your corporation afloat in the face of underground distribution channels, what would YOU do?
i'll bet your answers, if you're truthful, aren't that far from what's happening now.
How about Microsoft? They seem to be a little bit of both, advancing technology as well as producing content.
MS seems to belong in both categories, but chose to be against it. Interesting.
If I weren't nailed to the penis, I'd be pushing up the daisies!
it may sound silly, but what about a strike if any of the SSSCA and similar bill will pass? ... hmm this reminds me something...
Something like "we all tech workers who care about privacy will stop working until such acts are dismissed".
there will be threats. dangers of being fired. people working anyway. but hey, weren't that the same issues that the factory workers faced since the first industrial revolution?
and at that time, it was normal to work all day with no days off, with kids working all day doing the same underpaid job of their fathers just to pay for living, while big corporations are enlarging their profits by passing laws to a government that don't care at all about the workers
-- There are two kind of sysadmins: Paranoids and Losers. (adapted from D. Bach)
1) Make a U.S. version of windows, and make a non U.S. version of windows. With SSSCA stuff in the U.S. version, there will be incompabilities, not to mention the extra cost of making the other version.
2) Include the SSSCA "enhancements" worldwide, and risk the wrath of the European Union.
Got Freedom?
Thinking?
What I think is interesting is if you look at the interests. This looks like it will come down to pragmatics. Disney is strictly a media producer, supporting this doesn't hurt their interests in any way. AOL/Time Warner is both a media producer and for lack of a better term equipment maker. So that means they would "get" to go replace millions of cable boxes. Furthermore, they could be made liable for inadequate/outdated copy protection in the future. They might figure that HBO would get less subscriptions if no one could record the movies. So when you look at it this makes sense, those who carry the burden (AOL-TW) versus those who think they have nothing but to gain from it (Disney, News Corp, et al). Divide it cleanly along the lines of those who sell just media and those who have infrastructure/equipment.
About the only thing missing is prohibition. But we have global taxing and rulemaking without representation to make up for that, or perhaps SSSCA could make computing the underground role by (effectivly) prohibiting computers.
I wish more people would learn from history, it might save us some pain.
Novel theory: Modern Man evolved from psychopath
I think it's high time the slashcrew perfom a valuable service for the community. Implement a low pass filter so we can enjoy trolling magnificance without having to bother will all of those +5 insightful karma whores.
Propz to all
Send it via Fax, too. Make sure you have your return fax phone number and your address on the header so they know that you are from their district.
The SSSCA says that it is illegal to create, sell or distribute "any interactive digital device that does not include and utilize certified security technologies" that are approved by the U.S. Commerce Department. An interactive digital device is defined as any hardware or software capable of "storing, retrieving, processing, performing, transmitting, receiving or copying information in digital form."
Since the human brain stores information digitally by using protein chains, then everybody will have to have a brain implant.
Resistance is futile
To further spread the word about SSSCA, RIAA representatives have begun traveling from high school to grade school speaking on the evils of file sharing. After a recent speech at St. Bernard's Grade School in Peoria, Illinois, RIAA lawyer Russel Frackman found himself challenged by one of the students:
More here:
http://www.ridiculopathy.com/index.php?display=20
And implement it with advanced ROT31337 encryption.
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
Many of these companies in Hollywood use Linux and other free tools to produce their works of art. Could we, just as a sly move use the evils of the DMCA, etc, make it illegal for anyone to use Open Source software to create any works of art for the Music, Movie, Television, etc. industries with out having a notice running for the first five minutes on the evils of said DMCA, etc. laws?
And since the DMCA allows us to change the EULA without notice, we can force them to retro-actively make these changes in their products.
III.IIVIVIXIIVIVIIIVVIIIIXVIIIXIIIIIIIIVIIIIVVIII
I'll have to check if my representatives have PayPal accounts. I don't see a tip jar on their home pages.
so, the big question is: if YOU were a major media corporation's CEO, and YOUR family's livelihood depended on keeping your corporation afloat in the face of underground distribution channels, what would YOU do?
0 .html '"It's not that people would just buy legitimate software if they can't get pirated copies," Cheng Yi, a self-described "alternative software dealer" from the Guangdong province said through a translator. "Many people here can't afford the legitimate software, and it is capitalist to say that only the rich should have the advantages."'
That's the trick, though, isn't it? It's not their welfare that's being hurt by underground distribution channels. BSA companies in particular are some of the wealthiest companies in the world despite rampant piracy of their products. Truthfully, it's not even their pocketbook.
As has been said many, many times before, you *cannot* assume that a sale of your product through piracy would have resulted in a sale for you had the pirate copy not existed.
Case in point:
http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,47617,0
Do you think that every 15 yeal old webmaster who uses a warezed copy of Photoshop could get mommy or daddy to drop the $600 for a real copy? Does *anyone* think that less affluent people who build their own computer but don't really know linux can really afford a $300 Windows 2000 license?
The same goes for music. I don't buy RIAA CD's any more because of the RIAA's actions, but beforehand, I wouldn't even consider buying a CD without hearing at least some, and preferrably all the music from the disc. Napster was providing this service for millions. Accordingly, CD sales rose. Now that Napster is gone, CD sales have plummeted.
What is being hurt by underground distribution channels is control. In the case of the software companies, it's the ability to say who and who does not use their software. They lose the ability to lock people into licenses and 'upgrade cycles' if they are illegally using software. Even though they would never profit from those people, the loss of control is unbearable.
The same goes for the music industry. As has been noted by many research firms, Napster helped CD sales. Long and Short, CD sales rose while Napster was in operation and have now leveled off and even decreased. It was never about money for RIAA labels. It was about the ability to control not only their pet artists, but their listeners as well. Do you think that listener choice controls what is a 'hit' and what is not? Think again. A song may be catch, true, but the labels pour big $$$ into artist, songs, and music videos they want to be popular. This includes paying radio stations to play it, as well as putting together concerts, commercials, and promotional material. Look at 'O-Town' for chrissakes! The band is so fake they made a TV show about how fake it was. They have singles in the top 40 though. You think that wasn't entirely due to the effort of their label?
The same thing goes for movie studios, newspapers, televison networks, etc... etc.. etc...
We are living in a time that is analogous to the late middle-ages, just before the emergence of a real middle class. We have an oligarchy of rich, powerful individuals, Corporations and their executives in this case, who know that their continued survival is entirely dependant upon the serf classes. If those classes cannot be controlled, they cannot be trusted to allow the oligarchy to remain in power. Just like the French nobility, however, the aristocracy of money and power in the United States has decided not to try to adapt to the changing world.
Orv wiv'er heads...
The next Slashdot story will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush and slashdot the links early!
No, you're posting to
During the 18th century, thousands of weavers were put out of business when machines came along that could do their jobs faster, cheaper, more reliably and with better quality.
The weavers were obviously distraught and there were riots with the Luddites as they were known attempting to destroy the machines that put them out of business.
Over the last 200 years, technology has made many people redundant, from riveters to bank clerks. It's the media businesses turn now. It's just progress.
Anybody can replicate information, large media corporations with top heavy management structures and CD/DVD pressing factories are no longer required. They are doomed, redundant, as were the Luddites. All the legislation in the world won't change that.
The survivors will be small fast media companies who can take advantage of the digital media such as MPEGs and MP3s.
Government of the people, by corporate executives, for corporate profits.
So, either the war on drugs is creating the economic environment that supports al Qaeda, or else this claim by a "senior official" is BS intended to excuse military action in S. America. Why does it seem incredible to me that S. American coke runners would welcome or benefit from partnership with Moslem religious/political extremists? Yes, they do business with local Marxist insurgencies, but that's because those have a political base there. Like, Columbians need help money laundering or running drugs? And we're supposed to be prepared for this war not to end in "our lifetime"?
I'm prepared to stand behind America doing some really ugly things to those who have actually attacked us. Doing ugly things to those who provide consumer society with its vices I'm only for it also broadens to include the idiots who sold us the SUVs that make us oil-addicted clients of the Saudi princes who have financed bin Lauden all along.
"with their freedom lost all virtue lose" - Milton
I think hat a lot of people don't understand one thing about the SSSCA. I agree it would be a very bad thing if it were to become law. And yes there is a lot of bad stuff in it. However it only applies to things in the future. So the plexwriter that I've already bought is completely legal. However the plexwriter that is being designed by plextor right now, is not legal. They will have to cease manufacture of all non-secure hardwares and softwares.
The GeekNights podcast is going strong. Listen!
But when I submitted the story a couple hours before this one it was rejected in minutes.
Sheesh.
Same damn info too.
It attempts much the same thing.
And of course other companies are saying its bad - probably because they didn't have enough of a hand in it, that it would possibly be a negative effect on their area of business. Standard responses to attempted changes in copyright law.
Digital Copyright by Jessica Litman is a recommended read regarding copyright issues.
(And for a rousing speech to the masses - corporations DO write your copyright law!)
It funny sometimes I get unfocused for a moment(Really need to get my eye exam done), and read anti-piracy as anti-privicy...but then again, maybe its not misreading, so much as reading between the lines.
Power Corrupts,Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely, leaving one person(group)in charge is absolutely corrupt.
Watching from the UK, I genuinely cannot understand what planet these politicians/corporations are inhabiting. These laws will ONLY be effective within US territorial borders. Hmmm, what about the other 97% of the worlds population ? Somehow I don't see them playing ball. You guys are signing your own economic death warrant !
Because if they agreed to this law, then they probably would have to agree that the government could be justified in stepping in at any time to tell them how to design their hardware and software products. Wouldn't do to appear two-faced now would it.
Of, course, the MPAA doesn't like the proposed law because it doesn't go far enough.
CUR ALLOC 20195.....5804M
According to http://orlandosentinel.com/business/tourism/orl-as ecdisney23a102301oct23.story?coll=orl%2Dhome%2Dhea dlines
Disney is cutting hours and employees. Could a failing theme-park market be making Disney nervous and more likely to clutch it's media holdings like a straw in rapids?
You are not the customer.
Read the proposed legislation.
It doesn't make distinctions of "professional" or "consumer"- it's any computing device whatsoever.
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
It's simple, just create a cartoon/commercial kinda like disney did and show how all their devices are illegal or something. Hmmm, this isn't coming out very well, it was a lot better in my head, I guess it should stay there.
I suppose I won't post at +2 for this, too bad, because it was pretty funny in my head.
Things you think are in the Constitution, but are not.
Of course not. As others have pointed out, the phrase "fair use" does not appear in any of the bills either. It's not what any of them want, ever.
The only problem I see is what they claim not to have done is pretty close to what they agree that they did do.
Be careful out there - it's a villifying world these days.
sPh
However, I think we're on our guard and there's going to be many watching out for that one- this was being ran in stealth mode for a while before we caught wind of it. Hell, Hollings isn't talking to anyone about it other than the backers of the proposed bill.
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
Can you give one good reason why we shouldn't have a police state. As we all know, the government is the most powerful entity in the world and people should realize the fact that anything they do is for the benefit of our government. People should realize their place instead of posting anti-government comments on an illegal message board, such as /. . Anyone opposing the SSSCA should be registered as a terrorist and murdered on the spot.
Look in any truck stop. You'll find pirated tapes and CD's in a Lossless format for sale.
All it takes for it to happen online is someone to use shorten and a fat pipe to allow downloading/uploading. MP3's, WMA's, TVQ's, and Ogg's merely make it easier with the need for a fat pipe lessened.
They're on the brink of obsolecence right now- bandwidth is high enough to make it a real problem for them, they're pissing off the artists left and right, and they're beginning to see the pissing off of the consumers themselves.
I just wish they'd die or adapt quickly- all this tar-pit thrashing about they're doing right now is going to make things ugly for everyone, including themselves.
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
Maybe the next step for the tech community is to launch an all out campaign to make sure that Fritz doesn't get re-elected next time.
Why are we always so reactive and leaving it at that?
Maybe we should start being proactive instead and start a site like defeatfritz.com and start making an effort to strike back. Fritz has shown his true colors and it failed and now he should pay for his stupidity. Maybe if other congressman on the take see that there are severe consequences, maybe they won't be so fast to cash those MPAA/RIAA/Disney etc checks.
If someone had only did that to the dumb ass gentleman from Utah around the time of DMCA.....
Yuo can send an anti-SSSCA e-mail to Fritz Hollings from here:
http://freeipx.org/display.php3?id=126
TAKE ACTION SOON! CONTACT YOUR SENATORS TO MAKE SURE THE SSSCA DOESN'T EVER PASS!!
It's simple: Microsoft can't write secure software, IOW their software would allow to circumvent the protection. So it would be illegal for M$ to sell their software. Well...
Umm... hasn't SDMI been failing because each proposed version of the technology has been cracked in a matter of days? (And despite the RIAA threatening the researchers with litigation, at that!) Good reporting, ZDnet!
Steven N. Severinghaus
Yep, as soon as Sony, Disney and Time Warner can agree with Valentini, the deal will be done. I can see it applied to something less threatening, like DVDs. Then the DMCA can be used to crush anything that can circumvent it. The public has already swallowed it, hook line and sinker.
The implications are obvious. In the end, there will be no practical difference. Media companies will be able to point their finger at any piece of equipment that might be used to copy their stupid content, regardless of other legitimate functions.
Time to report Disney to the Un American Activities Board.
I actually did write to my senators about this. I chose to write a physical letter rather than an email, primarily because I believe email is still a quirky novelty to most elected officials.
This is the meat of my letter, which I sent to Senators Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxter of California:
As a constituent of yours, I'd like to alert you to a disturbing bill that may already be working its way through Congress. This bill, called The Security Systems Standards and Certification Act (SSSCA), was originated by Senator Fritz Hollings.
It requires that any "digital interactive technology" that is used in conjunction with copyrighted material must "utilize certified security technologies" approved by the federal government. This could include VCR tapes, compact discs, and the devices that run them, as well as all computers and software. Any of these devices will have to include encryption so that the information they contains can't be copied. The act would make it illegal to remove or alter the security technology, to transmit content where the security technology has been modified or removed, or to manufacture or distribute any digital device or software that does not incorporate the technology. It would become a civil offense to create or sell any kind of computer system that is free of this impediment.
The SSSCA could have very harmful effects on the world of open source software, which is fundamentally based on the freedom to legally share software under public licenses. By making it a crime to reverse-engineer software to develop compatible open-source products, open source software and access to its underlying source code may be in jeopardy. If this bill becomes law, the open source software industry may be destroyed. This loss combined with the cost of implementing the SSSCA itself could be staggering. It could have a very chilling affect on the Californian and even the national economy.
Even more importantly, I believe this bill encroaches individuals' freedom. The bill is motivated by motion picture and television studios that seek to end piracy of their movies and other forms of entertainment. As worthy as that goal may be, this legislation is not the right way to achieve it. It is no coincidence that many of the studios in question also happen to be among Sen. Hollings' highest campaign contributors. The heavy-handed approach to copyright protection that this legislation embodies empowers large media companies at the expense of the public. I believe they have more than enough control over the way people like ourselves share information as it is.
I very much hope you will oppose this extreme bill, just as I do. This may appear to be an issue that only affects or interests technical people, but I think anyone who values technology and values their liberty would oppose it. I like to think Californian Democrats value both.
I encourage all of you who are Americans to write to your own senators. It's very satisfying to fight for what you believe in.
q
Pot's largely harmless if you know it's pharmacology.
Cocaine is damn dangerous as are all the opiates.
Many of the halucinogens are dangerous as well.
All the deleriants (e.g. scopalamine) are very dangerous.
Dangerous in the sense of serious bodily harm in the form of easy overdose, injury to oneself because you're very definitely not in control of yourself, etc.
I don't agree with all the thinking they have, but some things are beyond ill-advised.
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
I'd like to see them try to pass another SSSCA bill if someone murdered Senator Hollings, citing the SSSCA as their motive.
So I just started reading the SSSCA and came across section 103, subsection (a) which states that to "transmit or make available to the public any copyrighted material or other protected content where the security measure associated with a certified security technology has been removed or altered" is a crime. But what about parties? If I play my favorite copyrighted security system enabled digital music file, the security system is not present in the signal leaving my speakers. Have I broken the law? Are we all supposed to walk around with headphones on? Or what about mix tapes/CD's? Often I'll make a mix CD of files, CD's, MD's by plugging the out of my devicces to the in on my sound card and recording. Is this illegal under the SSSCA? I mean, I'm not selling the CD's, just giving them to friends for gifts, or using them myself. I don't know, maybe I should read the whole draft before I ask questions.
"Since the ban imposed by Taliban supreme leader Mullah Mohammad Omar in July 2000, areas of Afghanistan under the control of the Islamist militia have witnessed a remarkable transformation as opium poppy cultivation has almost totally disappeared. This has resulted in some 70% of the world's illicit opium production being wiped out virtually at a stroke."
Afghanistan used to produce 75% of the world's heroin, according to Jane's Security. However, they claim that the Taliban and Pakistan, at the urging of the United Nations, have recently shut down poppie production in their respective territories.
The only remaining source of Afghanistan heroin seems to be the region under control of the Northern Alliance.
If you ran a $300,000,000,000 / year business (yes, that's 11 zeros, or about $1,000 for every person in the USA) and someone stepped on most of it, what would you do?
Now imagine that you are the sort of person who routinely uses violence to make permanent 'object lessons' of people for a couple of hundred dollars. What wouldn't you be willing to do to regain more than $200,000,000,000 per year?
- Osama bin Laden sailing up as the next Hitler. Even if he isn't I'm sure the US will make him look like it... I just hope he won't be able to make this into a western world - islamic war.
KjellaLive today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Hollings is probably the same guy who made it illegal to rip the tags off of our mattresses.
- The auditors said to secure the server... hand me that duct-tape -
There are a number of economists, sociologists, and dynamic systems modelers that have observed 50- to 60-year cycles in economic output, political attitudes, birth rates, tecnological adaptation, and other indicators. The work dates back to the 1920s, when Russian economist Nikolai Kondratieff predicted the Great Depression a decade in advance. (He wasn't popular with his communist colleagues, because he also predicted that the capitalist economies would rebound.)
Here's an article [wholeearthmag.com] from 1998 that gives a good overview of Kondratieff's work as well as more recent studies, and a website [1-888.com] with links to several others.
If these people are right, the good news is that things should go uphill over the next few decades.
TheFrood
If you say "I'll probably get modded down for this..." then I will mod you down.
Of course! It's the DMCA.
I bet you haven't heard about the DMCA II, have you?
Think about it. If Linux were outlawed by this act, wouldn't that be GREAT for Microsoft? Yes, but there are far worse elements in store for software vendors.
The problem is that the act forbids selling, offering to the public, importing, etc. any software device which does not include government certified security systems. A device is defined as something which processes, transmits, or displays information or data...
So hello.c would be illegal as would all the sample programs in computer science textbooks. In fact teaching computer science would be impossible because one would have to start on chapter 11 (pun intended). I can only assume that this would only be resolved by importing foreign programmers because it would be impossible to teach people in this country.
This has substantial ramafications for Microsoft and all other technology firms. I wonder if Disney is scared enough to try to deliberately kill the tech industry...
LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
(Now what? Write them a letter about it?...)
Well, let's see, IBM, Microsoft, Intel, Compaq, Dell, and Motorola oppose it.
I don't think it will get through if they're
serious about wanting it dead. =)
Just a practical thought.
How about we find the "Copy Proof" Cd's that can not be played in a computer and send one to each of our respective senators and congresspersons.
/. repeatedly that most of the people representing (I use the term loosely in some cases) us do not understand the implications of the laws the are passing.
Also Include a DVD from a region other than the United States(US is region 1, correct?).
Included In the envelope, fedex package or hand delivery a "voucher" from their district for a $50K "contribution" with the stipulation they only get said contribution provided the do not run afowl of the law by playing both disks on a computer of their choosing.
And if you really wanted to be cruel, provide the documentation electronically as an "e-book" that only allows *one* viewing and no printing.
It has been stated here on
This can only help, I think, to make it perfectly clear the kind of frustrating, draconian, unconstitutional and consumer unfriendly path we are headed down with this kind of nonsense.
If you really think about it, how long *before* the corporations buying this legislation start doing something similar?
Vendor lock-in is one thing, "legislative career lock-in to a corporation" is another.
Have you read the moderator guidelines? Well, have you, PUNK? (and I want a Karma: Gnarly option)
What does our friend Rep. Rick Boucher think about SSSCA? Let's hope he's firmly AGAINST!
Has anyone heard about an "open standard" for copy protection being developed at Stanford? I heard the studios are very int'd in this standard, potentially so it can be mandated under the SSSCA, but I've not been able to locate the actual standard yet.