Slashdot Mirror


Commerce Department Cool to CBDTPA

L. J. Beauregard writes: "Wired reports that the Commerce Department is not too thrilled about S.2048. Commerce Secretary James Rogan claims that 'the DMCA carefully balances the interests of all stakeholders,' a claim that marks him for a corporate whore, but it seems that there are some things even whores won't do."

12 of 179 comments (clear)

  1. Legislative Agenda by MrBrklyn · · Score: 5, Interesting
    This is really not as bad news as it might seems, and it gives those of us main stream advocates a chance to expose just how radical the position of the MPAA is.

    What we need to do is capitilize on this opportunity and expose the radical enemies of the public for the political radicals that they are. In addition, the MPAA is showing us exactly how to take the steps necessary to defend our fourth amemndment rights under the US Constitution in regard to digital media and privately owned digital devices.

    NY Fairuse is willing, with the help of it's sister organization, NYLXS, and with broad co-operation, it begin in Manhattan in May to gather together a broad coalition of IT Industry members, Librarians, Educators, Free Software Advocates, musicians, artisits, actors, and Internet Information Providers the Digital Property Protection Discussion Group.

    The purpose of forming this group is to draft and pass legislation which protects individuals 4th amendment rights with regard to their digital devices and media.

    The legislation to be drafted will accomplsih the following main stream objectives which all reasonable people can expect:

    All copyrights to individual scores, writings, and recordings will be returned to the original artist after a period of 10 years.

    No technology can be deployed which spies on, wiretaps or descloses privately owned information which is stored on digital devices by any government agency or private 3rd party without the issuance of a publically pronounced annd disclosed warrant l limited to a specific criminal investigation.

    All copyright cases must prove, prior to a judgement of guilt, proof that the actions in question did not infringe on Fair Use, and the individuals rights under the 4th and 1st ammendment of the Bill of rights US Constition.

    Ownership of all physical media and devices to read such media, is the sole property of the purchaser of the media, without an expressely negotiated and signed contract between both the copyright holder and the purchaser.

    No technological software or hardware method can be deployed in a digital product available for normal retail sale which inhibits in any way the full enjoyment of the property by the purchasers, regardless of any agreement between the designer of the hardware or software products. Such agreements are null, and not contractable.

    Copyright is an exception to Fair Use as it limited the ability for individuals to enjoy their private property and express themselves with the use of such copyrighted materials. Fair Use is a doctrin to be based on the 4th and 1st amendments of the Constitutions.

    Individuals have the right to express themselves to others about the means, mechanism and workings of all digital devices, including but not limited to discussion on how to make fair use of media, how to improve such devices, or to reverse engineer all such devices and the allgorithims which are used to help them display, copy or run media.

    We need to get as many big guns on this as possible and then relentlessly campaign, actively working to elect supporters and unelect opposition. In fact, we should look to defeat, not just the proposed spyware legistlation, but also defeat Senator Hollings

    WE CAN force him from office, because he's a radical.

    Ruben

    --
    http://www.mrbrklyn.com/amsterdam.html http://www.brooklyn-living.com
  2. Corporate whore? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I think the use of that word shows more bias than any statements this guy possibly could have made.

  3. Bout damn time by Brightest+Light · · Score: 3, Funny

    "Before Congress rushes into the imposition of a legislative solution," Rogan said, "I hope its members will grant more time for the free market to find its own middle ground."

    Thank the gods for that. Its about time somebody stands up and says "Hold on a second, lets give business the chance to make their own decisions,
    before we step in and legislate for them." I hope that more of this sort of thing happens in the future. I sincerely hope that those in congress decide
    to heed Mr.Rogan's words, and their voing reflects it.

    1. Re:Bout damn time by martissimo · · Score: 3, Funny

      i really wish i saw more of a positive angle from this statement, however this line makes me wonder

      In a speech last week, Rogan said that "negotiations are presently underway among hardware manufacturers and content owners to develop improved means for protecting online content," and legislators should wait for results before voting on a proposal such as the Hollings bill.


      sounds to me basically like he's saying "it's too soon to pass it", lets just warn the hardware people that they better do something soon, before we do pass it.

      1 more session of Congress without it being passed is a start, it gives us more time to rally more support, but this certainly doesn't look like the time to back off on applying pressure on the lawmakers

  4. typo in article by I+Want+GNU! · · Score: 3, Funny
    the DMCA carefully balances the interests of all stakeholders
    I think that's a type. It should be shareholders, as in shareholdings in the stock of Sen. Ernst Hollings, which is going rather cheaply these days. It carefully balances the interests of shareholders such as Disney with those of the RIAA and MPAA, who hold many shares in other political conglomerations.
  5. Corporate whores? Indeed. by AntiNorm · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Commerce Secretary James Rogan claims that 'the DMCA carefully balances the interests of all stakeholders,'

    Of course it carefully balances the interests of all stakeholders. Thing is, they don't see customers as stakeholders. An argument could be made that customers aren't stakeholders in this sense -- after all, they have no financial stake in whether most CBDTPA-protected works succeed or fail. Never mind the principles that are involved, it's all about money to corporations and to Congress.

    a claim that marks him for a corporate whore, but it seems that there are some things even whores won't do

    Like pay any attention to whether their customers care about what they're being exposed to? You could make some interesting comparisons here. The corporate whores are exposing their customers to CBDTPA; the rest of the analogy is left to the reader's imagination.

    --

    I pledge allegiance to the flag...
    of the Corporate States of America...
  6. Still not safe... by NickRob · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This isn't a time to rest on our laurels. Congress could still pass this thing. A simple majority wins, and Congress has passed many an unpopular act (USA Patriot anyone?) We still have to email and write letters and protest this thing and reach every single person we can.

    We keep recieving good news, but that doesn't mean we should slack off... it means that we should work harder and spread our message. Advocacy works.

  7. Restrictions on consumers OK, on business not-OK by Seth+Finkelstein · · Score: 4, Informative
    The view is that the DMCA is considered OK, because that's a restriction on comsumer's rights for the benefit of businesses. But S.2048 is a restriction on some businesses for the benefit of other businesses. That's another matter entirely.

    Take a look at:
    http://www.eff.org/IP/SSSCA_CBDTPA/20020322_eff_ao l-intel_critique.html
    [my comments in brackets]

    In his testimony before the Senate Commerce Committee, Intel Executive Vice President Leslie Vadasz courageously spoke out against the Hollywood moguls who are asking Congress make copy controls mandatory in all new technologies. Vadasz expressed skepticism of the demands of copyright industries, which he said "historically feared technology -- from the advent of sound recording, to the development of the VCR, the DVD, the PC, and other digital devices". He explained that innovation must not be sacrificed in an impossible quest to lock down every tool that might be used for infringement.

    [Note this is a restriction on some businesses for the benefit of OTHER BUSINESSES. The businesses who would be subject to this restriction obviously don't like that]

    By contrast, a March 19 joint statement by Intel Corporation and AOL Time Warner suggests a disappointing change of heart by Intel. The "AOL Time Warner -- Intel Joint Statement of Principles" envisions a world in which corporate negotiations decide consumers' rights, and government outlaws devices falling outside a "consensus" imposed by Hollywood at lawyer-point. According to the joint statement, "The goal of these efforts is to create an overall architecture for protecting digital content throughout its distribution life so that it does not 'leak' out in an unprotected manner" -- with the result that copyright holders shape the digital architecture of the future, retaining the power to control your use of the movies, music and books you buy.

    [Note this is a restriction on consumer's right for the benefit of businesses. The businesses love that.]

    Sig: What Happened To The Censorware Project (censorware.org)

  8. Little Excessive by ender81b · · Score: 5, Insightful

    a claim that marks him for a corporate whore, but it seems that there are some things even whores won't do

    Allright, now listen - I hate the CBBLAH & DMCA, etc like everyone else. But, come on now, is it REALLY necassary to call them whores when posting this news to the site? ATTENTION SLASHDOT EDITORS: it doesn't make you look very professional or worthy of respect when you result to cheap tactics like this.

    Leave it to people like ME to call them whores but please not on the main page. it just doesn't give us a very solid position to argue from if you result to name-calling on the main page.

  9. Re:Ermm.. anyone else notice this part of the stor by Lemmy+Caution · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Just wait till the apply it to portscans. But hey, there's a war against terror! You can be an Enron exec and squander the life savings of thousands of employees away, but I doubt that there will be more than 10 years of jail time done between the lot of them. However, a 19 year old script-kiddie gets a little full of beans and brings down a couple Exchange servers, and it's a lifetime of forced sodomy for him. Yet people still believe in the "justice" system - why the hell not, we get the best justice money can buy!

  10. Re:Nothing to get excited about by NoMoreNicksLeft · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Since when are we not in deep shit? The democrats are more than willing to trade some pork barrel tax dollars to get it passed.

  11. Too bad... by mikethegeek · · Score: 3, Insightful

    That the Founders weren't wise enough to end the Bill of Rights as it started:

    "Congress shall make no law"...

    Every law passed (and there are thousands every year), at the state, local, and federal level creates a new crime and takes away some freedom. And people wonder why we are becoming a Lawyerocracy?

    With the million or so laws on the books nationwide, it's IMPOSSIBLE for even the most law abiding citizen to go though any given day, week, month, or year without breaking many...

    Which is slavery. The law should be simple, and understandable by all.

    We are supposed to be a Republic, based on majority rule through representatives, with civil rights protected by a Constitution. Tell me, anyone, how the DMCA or CBDTPA serves the majority interest, or isn't contrary to the Constitution?

    --
    === The price of freedom is eternal vigilance