Slashdot Mirror
File-sharing, Digital Rights Management, Etc.
Politech has a couple of good articles on political developments in the post-Napster world. (That's almost a Katz phrase there, isn't it?) The folks behind Kazaa, when they're not busy spying on their userbase, took the time to write to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee after a bashing they took a few weeks ago. Kazaa's new owners suggest a general royalty fee, perhaps similar to the recent webcasting fees, be put in place to compensate intellectual property holders for file-sharing. Meanwhile, the European Commission takes a look at digital rights management. Looks like Europe will get its own version of the SSSCA.
You are going to get pretty much unitary legal structures on intellectual property and music copying. That's what's been planned by groups like the World Economic Forum and the World Trade Organization for years.
What's more, there won't be too much debate on perspectives other than those put forward by U.S. law and the major music corporations. That's because these firms and the U.S. government are able to dominate the meetings of business decisionmakers.
The protesters outside global gatherings are, in part, fighting for freedoms in music copying and things like this. What they are doing is trying to get more than a few voices into the meetings where these decisions are made. You should consider lobbying these global groups like the WTO - it doesnt make you a "bomb throwing anarchist," and it may be more effective than lobbying your congressperson, 'cause that's where the decisions are getting made.
Goat sex free since 2001
Soak
Wash
Repeat
I'm getting fed up of this bullshit. We all know that in 20 years the technology for online music exhange will still be here and it'll be legal. The music industry is doing the exact same thing the petroleum cies did, boycott the product until they own it. Then market it and prepare the market (ie. electrical cars), and finally say you played along the whole time, while unveiling your product.
The birth of a new monopoly, the same as before, just different packaging.
Imperium et libertas
Autocracy and freedom
There are so many people out there sharing music and other files, that it would be difficult to actually stop them. The RIAA thought that people would give up on downloading mp3s after the death of Napster, but instead the music exchange continued (and may have even grown). Schemes like gnutella have been largely invulnerable to attack from the {RI,MP}AA, although they could still be improved to further protect their users.
My point is this: no matter what they do, people will find a way around it. There may be some martyrs at every turn, such as Emannuel Goldstein and Derek Fawcus with DeCSS, but now CSS is all but broken, and virtually anyone can find DeCSS if they look. A DRM OS, while evil, can still be broken, and tracking down the subversives who use Linux/BSD and other "unAmerican" OSes would prove difficult. And if the governement started coming after the people, they just might have a revolution on their hands.
This isn't something to get overly depressed about. We should be fighting it, but even if they win the battle of legislation, we are still able to continue the war.
Buford "Mad Dog" Tannen
We have also seen how perfect encryption is fundamentally impossible, although being good enough for government work may get by.
Somehow, the connection between this and the SSSCA could mean that Microsoft could be the only legal OS in the US. Purely coincidental of course.
I think this should be investigated, just in case my paranoia has a legitimate case to make. Microsoft has a habit of too many convenient coincidences.
Maybe they'll all go to jail because they will not be able to obey the law and provide an impossible result. I'm not holding my breath.
"It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"
A clearing-house of sorts (like the radio-royalty structure already in place) would solve 98% of the "file sharing problem."
I think the current limits on bandwidth really are going to make widespread DVD sharing a little unlikely, even with broadband. The files are just too big. If it takes 412 hours to download a movie (at lower quality with fewer features, etc.), people aren't going to care. They'd probably rather just go to Blockbuster and rent it for $4 or whatever.
Perhaps it could even be tied to bandwidth and charged at the ISP level. Say $.10 for every gig of downstream bandwidth used. Money goes to a clearing house and member copyright holders are paid based on the amount of material they have licensed to the clearing house. The more stuff they license, the more they get paid. There should also be a limit on the cost of the licenses written into the agreement so once everyone signs up it doesn't become $1000/gig.
I think in radio now, anything with a particular label (or stamp or something) can be played royalty free without limits, incorporated into other forms (like commercials, etc.) and so on. Music industry doesn't complain about that at all, because it is free publicity for their product. Same thing here.
This really would help solve almost all of the problems with file-sharing and it is a win-win of sorts. Pay-per-play it isn't, but pay-per-play isn't going to work anyway.
Goddammit! If Europe gets the SSSCA, my plans to become an irresistably chic Espresso-sipping Parisian nouveau hacker are dashed.
Looks like I'm moving to Sealand. They better have a whole lotta instant, that's all I can say.....
- undoware.ca
I've often thought that one should use whatever means are commensurate with the threat at hand to defend one's constitutional rights, including killing those who would take them away, collateral damage be damned, if it comes to that. Otherwise, such rights are meaningless.
The only issue then, after (for example) killing the dozen cops trying to arrest you for daring to run Linux, is whether you have a constitutional right to do so.
If so, you go scott free.
If not, you fry.
I'd think that, with the stakes so high, we would not see very much murder in the name of defending bogus rights that do not exist.
You could've hired me.
CDs cost less than cassettes, but are priced higher, "because of apparent value". Tell that to computer makers, who pack more and sell for less, every year. IMHO, the price of real products is a compromise between cost of manufacture and what the competition will allow. Look at the price of DRAM, for an example. And of course we all know that next to nothing of that $18 CD that cost $0.10 to make went to royalties for the artists.
Also IMHO, the only business where "apparent value" can be a true factor in pricing is where competition is absent, that is a CARTEL or MONOPOLY. In the case of CDs, we have the joy of both at the same time.
There's the old lesson from videotapes: $80 tapes get pirated bigtime, $20 tapes don't. Plus tapes aren't $20, any more.
I feel ripped off every time I buy a CD, and thus I buy very seldom, principally as gifts. At half the price, I'd buy more than twice as many. At a third the price, more than thrice. At some point, storage would become the limiting factor, not money and purchase price.
Movies are headed the same way, and what's unfortunate about all this is that we're about to take a hurting tech sector and send it down in flames with SSSCA-type legislation. We're about to say that Jobs and Woz, or Hewlett and Packard will NEVER happen again, at least not in computing, because SSSCA turns the entire computing field into sealed boxes, and locks the innovator out.
At the very least, opt-in would be workable. Strong enough crypto to require hardware chips, maybe even crypto all the way into a sealed monitor. Better than SSSCA, anyway.
Of course copyright reform would be better yet. Isn't it interesting that patent durations have remained steady? Says something about the media industries, and what we've allowed them to turn into.
The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
The RIAA doesn't want people to have digital copies that they can burn.
File sharing companies at least want to deliver something that we can hear, watch, and experience.
The fast track[tm] technology that is used by products such as Kazaa[tm] and Music City's Morpheus[also tm] is pretty strong and can combine clients/servers to provide media almost on demand for people who have dsl/cable and above. Gnutella also is becoming the strongest in terms of a network that may never be truly killed. And let's not forge Napster, the demon of P2P IMHO; they may actually sell some media to people.
No one wants to bother with DRM. Computer users will most likely reject any such system. So, the simple solution is to take a somewhat common sense approach.
Advertising and competition must come into play so that the P2P business isn't stomped on by media owners [of course, if the money comes in no one gets stomped]. Maybe one network will offer digital copies, fast browsing and strong searching. Another might offer a way to put your media on a personal server and a winamp/xmms/FreeAmp/Netscape/IE et.al. plug-in will be the search and viewing client. Finally an open and free network which will probaly be supported by an array of advertising stunts.
The point is, we can have a system where no one is abused. DRM isn't needed if people use common sense and let these systems evolve into a decent business model. Not everything will work. But media/content owners can be payed. One thing I think we will need to get over is the fact that P2P systems may collect data on what is downloaded, viewed, and listened to.
If we don't think of P2P as a way to get free stuff and show our friends how cool we are because we watched LOTR 2 days before release we may save it. Let's think of it as Cable, Network TV and the like. But like some cable channels if you don't want commercials you are going to have to pay up.
Look at XM radio, in my town it's becoming quite popular. We can take advantage of technology in a good way.
Get your Unix fortune now!
The internet, which once held the promise to liberate 'the masses', allow point to point communication on a scale never before seen, is now being co-opted by the mass media by force of law. That's just wonderfull.
Btw, I'm being sarcastic.
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
I don't believe the SSSCA will ever come to pass.
I strongly disagree. With all due respect, you are niave.
Let me see now. I'm old enough to have said to myself under my breath....
I don't think the government will let Microsoft get away with it.
I don't think the DMCA will ever come to pass.
I don't think the CDA will ever come to pass.
I don't think that encryption will ever be illegal.
I don't think anything will ever come of CALEA.
Should I go on?
I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
It's my greatest wish that bands like this are the future of music. Musicians: screw record contracts, publish your stuff yourselves, because you love making music.
Liberal (adj.): Free from bigotry; open to progress; tolerant of others.
at the current (insane) price of new CD's, I think it's safe to say they already have included a P2P tax, infact, you could say that is why P2P is so popular, people are already paying that tax, so why not do it?
Realy, if they priced CD's a little more reasonably this would be much less of an issue, there is a reason you can get all those older CDs for $5 each, and that is that it is STILL profitable to sell them at this price!
Unfortunately (well, fortunately
Imagine if this law was passed in the U.S. and in Europe, but not, say, in Canada. Many programmers would protest, ineffectively, and decide to live with it no matter how distasteful; but a not insignificant minority might say "Canada's looking pretty good right about now".
If even this minority decided to move to Canada the country would suddenly inherit a wealth of technical expertise - unfettered technical expertise - which would result in a boom in its technological industries. Along with a resultant expansion in the economy and the creation of thousands of new jobs.
All you need is one savvy, future-oriented nation to say "no thanks" to these kinds of laws while it sits back and reaps the rewards of dissent in other nations. Not to mention the sales (roundabout or direct) of non-crippled devices to countries which have outlawed their own industries from producing these goodies.
(I'm using Canada as the example because, so far, they don't appear to be caught up in the same sort of digital hysteria that seems to be sweeping the U.S. and Europe. I could be wrong - any resident Canadians, feel free to correct me.)
Max
My god carries a hammer. Your god died nailed to a tree. Any questions?