Slashdot Mirror
BusinessWeek on Open Source and Copy Protection
prostoalex writes "An article starting with the words "Forget about Bill Gates, folks. The biggest enemy of free software may be Senator Ernest F. Hollings" historically had a little chance of being published in a recognized business publication. In this case, though, Business Week (no registration) runs a detailed but straightforward explanation of how the new copyright bills could threaten free software and open source movements."
there is software development and usage outside of the USA; the USA isn't the whole world. Free software won't just die out because corporatelisimo senators ban it in the USA. Besides, what geek is going to stop using Linux on his home boxen because of some dumb law?
It would seem very hard to take back something that is out and freely available. There will allways be a place where it is legal and a site to download it. Certainly an act of Congress isn't going to stop the worldwide development effort. It has kind of a parallel to the attempt to ban crypto outside of the US. It just won't work and basicly for the same reasons.
but something you should know: Information on Senator Ernest F. Hollings of South Carolina
A while back, the USA had a 'war' against communism. Today there apparently is one against software communism.
/me relaxes in Europe
Hollywood needs to learn that in order to survive it needs to change their business model so that it adapts to changes in technology, rather than change/control technology to suit aging business models. A perfect example of this is the following paragraph taken from the article in regards to VCRs.
THE VCR SCARE. In 1982, Jack Valenti, president of the Motion Picture Association of America, famously proclaimed that the videocassette recorder was as threatening to the movies as the Boston Strangler was to a woman walking alone. Twenty years later, video rentals account for 46% of studio revenues, vs. the 24% collected at the box office.
Sounds like history is repeating itself and the MPAA hasn't learnt anything from the past. The MPAA needs to stop being stubburn about changing their business model and start adopting new technologies rather than fighting them off. People like George Lucas have the right idea, as I hear he makes most of his profits off the merchandise.
aus.music.scrapbook
I think writing our congressmen has about the same statistical chance of affecting them, as most voodoo rituals do.
I don't believe in voodoo.
However, it is fun to torture dolls dressed up as politicians. I highly recommend it.
Nows a good time to stock up on un drmed CPU's, motherboards, hdd's, ram, cdrw and the rest.
Treated well, and unused until needed, each one should late about 7 or 8 years. Get 10 full computers now, a few thousand cdr's, store them well and they should last until the revolution - or at least your death.
As CMOS limits in 2012 makes clear, Bloat will have to be removed in ten years in order to continue increasing the power of computing...
Perhaps Hollings thinks he can stop such a machine? Hmmmm.......T3????
Yes MS fate is sealed!!!!!
This article may be the best answer yet for why Linux and Free Software community members should care about adaptation by the community at large.
Two things struck me:
1. Linux has enough mind share and has been adapted by enough businesses to solve real business problems that a threat to Linux is a threat to many businesses, which is why a mag like BusinessWeek is interested.
2. Did you notice the way they referred to Hollywood? Hollywood will this, Hollywood wants that. Sounds very much like a dark force and I think that's the effect it will have on readers, especially those who wonder what in hell Hollywood is doing in the middle of what ought to be governmental functions.
The article did a great job linking to other articles in the text, one of them explaining how region coding DVDs forces regular customers to become criminals in order to watch the movies they've bought. A pleasant breath of fresh air from a more mainstream niche media player.
I spent a year in Iraq looking for WMD and all I found was this lousy sig.
I've never understood why these sorts of publications should not care about anti-Linux issues. Any *good* business publication will realise that their readers *do* want to know about things that save them money. If you had to pay for air, do you really imagine a savvy business paper wouldn't discuss a new possibility of getting air for free. Why should they believe in commoditisation of everything, rather than acknowledge that businesses with lower overheads get higher profits...?
Another reason why Hollywood and Co. need to look into changing their business model is that sooner or later any copy-protection gets cracked. It may not be legal, it may not be right, but let's face it - it always happens! And when it does that copy-protection system is instantly worthless. Apart from annoying open-source fans like us they are just wasting their own time and money developing these things! I wonder sometimes if it has ever occured to them to combat piracy by just charging less for DVDs, CDs Videos etc. We all know it's costing them coppers to make so it's hardly surprising that people get tempted by pirate copies. If a brand new DVD was, say, 5 quid instead of 25 I think more people would go for that rather than a pirate copy which may still be cheaper but probably has inferior quality and lacks extras and a fancy cover.
Naughton is also the author of A Brief History of the Future, which is an excellent read.
Reality is defined by the maddest person in the room
Yep, I can see all the little kids lining up at Toys R Us for their Hannibal Lecter action figures, complete with muzzle and fava beans.
"Copyright 2002 , by The McGraw-Hill Companies Inc. All rights reserved"
Following the available link to their main page... and a bit further, we arrive here . I seriously doubt there are any of us who haven't come accross a McGraw-Hill textbook at some point in time during our "career".
I'm certainly not saying this isn't a good article... it is... one of the best I've read on the topic so far, but it is also interesting to note we are watching major industries trading body blows with the press as their gloves. Rest assured, if the industries didn't have anything to loose from such legislation, we sure wouldn't be reading articles like this.
Attack of the Clones DVD came out the same day here in Asia as the movie hit the theaters in the US. Hollywood execs are idiots if they think that any move with US law will thwart piracy overseas. As long as there is a market, there will be ways around. IF they were actually to get this bill passed the following would happen:
The first business to pop up will be graymarket chips that break the encryption. The algorythoms used for encryption will be either reverse engineered overseas, or will be walked right out the back door of some hollywood firm or hardware manufacturer by a disgrunted employee or director.
The second thing is what is already happenening now, pirated flicks hit the streets overseas in DVD format well ahead of when the hit the stores in the US.
It just sends chills down my spine thinking if these laws get passed, because they won't stop any piracy, they will just kill open source. And that is NON CONSTITUTIONAL. Please, write your senators and congressman and President Bush.
Real men don't need signitures!!!
The first clue that Black has none is her assertion that "consumer groups, plus makers of PCs and electronics gear" were the first to sound the alarm. That may have been her first notice, but others have been thinking about such things and publishing it for much longer, like this man, back in 1983. The whole free software movement is a reaction to OTHER PEOPLE REMOVING YOUR CONTROL OF YOUR COMPUTER AND MEANS OF PUBLICATION, the reasons for it and the evil things required to accomplish that goal.
Jane then goes right back to things that must be nearer and dearer to her heart, Hollywood profits. She's swallowed the lie, hook and sinker, that this is about entertainment and a eighty billion dollar consumer electronics market.
Though confused and rambling, Jane manages to be smug and insulting. Check this out:
Embedding copyright-protection mechanisms into new PCs and other digital devices would mean inserting pieces of software code that are hidden, or locked down, and couldn't be altered. That would amount to nothing less than an assault on the open-source religion, which advocates sharing, collaboration, and free access to code.
That's all I can stand folks, let me set this ninny straight.
It's about freedom, stupid. I don't care if I can watch a movie on my computer. I don't care that a set top box runs propriatory software. What I do care about is some idiot telling me that I have to have a program installed on all of my computers that effectivly makes OTHER PEOPLE ROOT. THAT GIVES OTHER PEOPLE CONTROL OF MY COMPUTER AND MEANS OF PUBLICATION.
Don't get confused. Telecomunications companies, entertianment companies and your federal government are afraid of freedom. That's why someone else controls the wires that go into your house. It's why a 69 channel TV tunner will only pick up 4 or five stations owned by three or four companies. Hollings stuff, however, has the potential to control ALL forms of publication and must be stopped.
A supposed friend that trivializes your issue and get's it all screwed up is not a good advocate. Thanks for looking into it Jane, but keep digging. There's truth at the end of your quest, but you will have to stay away from entertainment pimps, their attorneys and other people only interested in extracting money from you.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
Because those who would be providing the air for free wouldn't advertise in business magazines as much as those those who distribute air for cash.
Deck the walls with bowels of Hollings
Fa la la la la la la la la
Engage in DMCA maulings
Fa la la la la la la la la
Go to EFF fundraiser
Fa la la la la la la la la
Zap Valenti with a taser
Fa la la la la la la la la
Ergonomica Auctorita Illico!
Now, on the other hand, screw with my computer? Force me to buy hardware that has been "Hollywood" approved? Sun, IBM, HPQ, and Intel will *all* buy into the "Hollywood" approved hardware? I don't think so. These companies serve a much larger market than just the end-user consumer. That will start the revolution.
P.S. - To Jack and Hilary: When you get your "Hollywood" hardware, your protected DVDs, and your protected CDs, watch what happens to your market share. The public is not going to buy new hardware to play your "anti-pirate" movies and music. Basic economics: the cost of entry will be too high.
before the libertarians mouth off, please not that this is private industry pushing hollings for this law. bad gov't typically gets bought by "free enterprise" when people don't pay any fucking attention to their gov't.
too many people in america complain that their gov't doesn't work right, maybe they should get off their ass and vote a better one in.
ah, rant done, feel better.
hey, go visit fairvote.org
US Citizen living abroad? Register to vote!
Hollywood is doing just fine the way they are.
R IAA/DVD-Association-endorsed reel of advertisement-laden "entertainment".
The thing is, Valenti's rantings aside, they have a killer business model - no matter how nazi-ish their percieved business practices are, people still flock to the theatre to see whatever crap they decide to spoon down our throats.
(think Matrix, LOTR, Crouching Tiger et alia, Star Wars, and so on...)
I mean, COME ON!?!? This is perhaps the one place on earth where people actually are aware of what is happening with this industry and yet every other story lately seems to be about how we should all flock to the next MPAA/Time-Warner-AOL-Disney-CocaCola/Scientology/
If you don't support what they are doing, Don't Go:
Don't go to the theater. Don't rent the DVD. Don't buy the Harry Potter Happy Meal. Don't buy the T-Shirt...
If you can't do that much, then you are showing that this tiny minority has absolutely no hope of making the slightest impact on how Hollywood operates.
Why don't we all just officially give up on this topic?
We're the only ones who claim to care and we don't seem to care enough to change our habits.
Whatever...
Jim in Tokyo
-- My Weblog.
If this law passes, could I migrate to Europe as a political refugee?
Don't kid yourself. This actually proves that a bigger part of the population is stupid or misinformed or just plain evil and doesn't share our views at all.
They do, howerver, care about their own freedom. I know at least one business man who is not very happy about what computer records the federal government can demand since septemeber 11th. When it comes down to competitive advantage and secrecy, businesses clammer for their own freedom to use encryption. Do you know anyone who trusts secrets to a M$ OS? Business will work to at least make exceptions to this goofey law for their "business systems" opposed to "consumer devices" It will be in everyone's best interest to show that will not work.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
All these new technology laws out there (except anti-SPAM laws) suck, but do they really have any statistical impact?
The rulings against Napster hasn't put a dent in file-sharing. No legal actions ever will, especially now with completely decentralized services, like LimeWire, which are open-sourced and who's development can never be stopped, due to it being open-sourced.
The ruling against DeCSS hasn't put a dent in its distribution or use.
Quite frankly, courts or government's don't have the power to regulate the internet. For one thing, there's jurisdiction issues: simply distribute from Russia, for example. For another, they can't necessarily hold anyone accountable for developing such (say Open-DVD players or file-sharing) software, because people can collaborate and contribute anonymously, from public computers, using a "handle".
Of course, this is a threat to open (that is, non-anonymous) development of OSS of FS, but big deal. If developers are really that eager for recognition, they can move to a country with no prohibitions on the software and openly develop there.
This doesn't mean we shouldn't fight against these laws. In fact, its a good reason to advocate not passing these laws: because they just don't work.
social sciences can never use experience to verify their statemen
An AC wrote:
> This one could change everything. Please, everyone, write (not email)
> your senator! It's easy to find out [senate.gov] who your senator is if
> you don't know already.
Write your representatives in the House too.
> This one is too big to be hacked around. The political process is our
> only hope.
The political process is breaking down here in the US. Who elected the president? Certainly not the other 49 states. It was a big roulette wheel in Florida that determined who won, with the Supreme Court dictating when to stop the wheel. This stupid legislation would have never been proposed if the MPAA and RIAA didn't "own" Hollings.
The presidential election "joke" angered and upset people. It is those same real people of this country, not just the geeks and technical types, who have the power to change this. The Business Week article is good, use it and others to get the word out in a way people can understand it. Send letters to the editor and press releases (yep, anybody can write one, and lots of newspapers and sites would love to have something to put in their next edition), particularly to independent media outlets. Make people understand, and make them mad! Force this as a major issue (both Hollings bill and the more general issue of Congress serving Hollywood, or whoever that bribes them, instead of the people) in the November 2002 elections. Make it abundantly clear to the members of Congress just who it is they are there to serve. Make it equally clear to them that they won't be in Congress much longer if they don't serve the people who elected them.
Abraham Lincoln never said anything about a government "of Hollywood, by Hollywood, for Hollywood and their greed"!
Bells are ringing: Mothra, Mothra!
Every heart is calling: Mothra, Mothra!
Come on, Tok Wira, these sharks have gotta pay!
New Kirk calling Mothra, we need you today!
You've lost the DVD. No matter what you do, the pirates got you on that one. It won't be until the next major technology update that you get to enforce anything. So here's my plan for you. Forget trying to control the entire tech industry.
Since people might copy those files they download
online, don't make anything available online. Yes, that could be a viable market in the future, but since you're so worried about piracy, simply don't use it.
Don't allow any manufacturers to create a drive that can read your next incarnation of the DVD. Yes, a lot of people have computers, and a lot of people will want to use those computers, and their lack of ability to watch movies on that medium might result in fewer sales for you, but that's a risk you have to take.
You have no right to control an entire industry just because you're concerned that your outdated business strategy might fail as a result. And be careful. You're stepping on a lot of toes here. You might end up alienating a significant percentage of your market, far in excess of the perceived damage that piracy might cause. I for one have almost completely stopped watching movies. It used to be I'd go to the theatre at least once a week, and I'd rent movies several times a week, I had cable, I bought tapes. Not anymore. I canceled cable, I never watch TV at all anymore. I saw episode 2 last thursday. I will probably not see another movie until december. I've chosen a new form of entertainment and it doesn't involve you in any way. Mostly I do this because I want to avoid addicting myself to a medium that someday might be restricted for me. That way, when you finally let the hammer drop, it won't make a bit of difference to me.
But getting inside my computer WILL make a difference to me, especially if I don't ever watch your crappy movies. There are a whole lot of people that will accept substandard, inconvienent, expensive ways to watch their movies, in the name of preventing piracy. But once you reach into someone's computing experience outside of movies, you're going to piss people off. And you will not benefit from it.
-Restil
Play with my webcams and lights here
That is a very good point -- the public is not going to put up with (at least not for long) being told that they have to buy all new hardware every couple years, since it will all have to be replaced every time DRM gets sufficiently cracked.
:(
A solution to that upgrade treadmill is if DRM winds up being handled by a little settop box, call it a DRM Decoder. ALL your consumer electronics (including your computer) would perforce plug into it, and you buy an updated chip (or download a patch similar to a BIOS update) every couple years as the DRM is updated to catch up with last year's hacks. This would make the economics palatable to average folk, especially if it's primarily wireless so they don't have a mess of cables all over the house. (Gad, imagine the potential for 3rd-party snooping!)
If I can think of this solution, I'm sure the DRM advocates can as well. This Is Bad.
Personally, I'll do without DRM-crippled media, thank you very much.
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
They realize that the revenue stream for movies is there. They also realize that those DVD's aren't just being bought for the TV-Connected DVD players. They're being bought for the Imacs and the laptop DVD's and for people like me who don't see the point in purchasing two DVD systems. They also know about the high number of people using KaZaa over broadband connections.
Hollywood knows about the revenue stream. They also know that digital data can be copied and stread (faster than tapes) and they are taking steps to assert their control.
History is repeating itself but Hollywood's one step ahead this time. They couldn't kill the VCR. Now they squeeze it for every cent that they can while installing copy protection. New VCR's made for the U.S. market all include copy protection built in that messes with the signal from other VCR's or DVD's that are connected to them. Thus necessitating that you patch the VCR through the DVD and into your TV.
Hollywood figures that they got lucky when it came to VCR's but whyt risk it? Jack really needs that 347th ferrari. And let's not forget the "implicit contract" that we all signed to do whatever the greedy bastards tell us to.
This is one issue that doesn't seem to fall into the normal party stereotypes. It seems that Democrats are actually the ones driving these bills.
Who'd a thunk it?
If we really want to win the battle, we've got to provide a solution that works for everyone: it's got to prevent napsterization (which for all the rationalizations, is clearly wrong if the artist doesn't want it copied), while still allowing people to listen/watch what they've paid for when and how they want. And there's only one way to prevent napsterization: a hardware decrypter in the video/sound card. This does not prevent an open source driver --- rather it requires encrypting content to the set of devices you own, which is primarily a key management problem. Maybe you have to register DVDs/CDs to obtain the media keys encrypted to your hardware (which wouldn't require personal information, only the public keys of your devices). This would have the side effect of letting them say "people who like x also like y", for what that's worth. We need better connectivity before this will fly, of course, and the end result needs to be simple enough for grandma to use, but it's an example of solving the problem in a way that satisfies everyone except those whose primary motive really is ripping off content or those who simply *must* say "NO! You can only watch this from 8-9 Tuesday night!". Does anyone else have another solution?
All technology companies and open source people need to do is to carry along as they always have and ignore this stupid shit.
They can't arrest everybody.
Time to start resisting.
Steve's Computer Service, Hobbs, NM
Yeah, I know I saw a Sony-distributed movie recently, but I intend to be more vigilant in the future.
If you really need your corporate media, buy it USED. Half.Com is a good place to start. So is Second Spin and Powell's.
Stop buying new DVDs and CDs. Stop going to movies. Maybe even get rid of your cable service, because the cable companies pay their tribute to the MPAA and the RIAA too. Take the money you would have used on new DVDs, new CDs, movie tickets and cable bills and donate it to the EFF.
And for crissake FAX YOUR CONGRESSCRITTER! And like Zappa always reminded us, Don't forget to vote.
Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power multiplied.
Let's see how happy you are when you're facing 10 to 20 for possession of devices designed to circumvent copyright protection (i.e. anything not sanctioned by Hollywood). The solution is not to attempt to work around these laws. They'll just keep tightening them and throwing offenders in jail. Our government doesn't seem to have any aversion to imprisoning a large percentage of its population, as the drug war has amply demonstrated. As long as the rich and powerful get to stay that way, they'll do whatever it takes. Most people are too stupid, ignorant, or apathetic to take any action against these kinds of actions by the government. They just believe what they're told.
It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
The lifting of sanctions would allow importing of dangerous materials so the US cannot lift them. One of the first guys Saddam would sell weapons to is binLaden.
This makes it necessary for the US to maintain sanctions against Iraq despite the fact that Iraqi children are dying. I don't have a problem admitting that I am indirectly murdering thousands of Iraqi children to safeguard myself from binLaden getting nukes. I don't have to live in a dream world or invent a convoluted excuse that Saddam is killing them, if I wanted to lie to myself I would have taken the blue pill.
A caveman dreams of being us, the incalculable power and riches. We dream of being Q, then what?
Just as in the Soviet Union, there was not much point in trying to be innovative or come up with good ideas, the IT industry in the US would suffer from laws that constrict what you can devise and what you can't. If there are laws inhibiting small firms (which are in general more innovative than larger ones), the OSS movement and the hardware industry from coming up with newer products the market in the US would possibly stagnate because there just wouldn't be any motivation to work on somthing new (P2P for example) if one has to fear legal presecution for developing a new technology.
As someone further down posted, I doubt that other countries will follow the US' example to the letter (although you can be sure that some US governments will try to force this onto some other countries). This would mean the at least a portion of the innovative edge will move outside the US and the US would fall behind because every technology would have to be "approved" by some body in the US. And you can bet that some countries and blocs will make as much PR capital out of this as they can ("US oppression etc"), and it would possibly make the current tension between the EU and the US worse than it is.
The larger corporations would not initially be hurt that much as they could attempt to pass the price rises entailed in developing and implementing DRM-compatible hardware and software on to the consumers, who would more than likely respond by buying less than they had before (The Napster example again, wrongly interpreted by the MPAA and RIAA). As is usual with seemly blind official organisations such as those mentioned above, they would in turn respond by trying to turn the screws even tighter than before claiming that piracy is growing (which it possibly very well could, considering that people who would copy their media would be labeled as criminals and be forced underground -as in the prohibition era in the US). It would, in other words, simply be a vicious circle and would probably, in the end drive the RIAA and MPAA into bankruptcy (Could those be voices saying "I told you so" in the background?) and certainly hurt the US economy.
Another good example would be Microsoft's attempts to raise prices with it's new licencing scheme - It simply drives more companies to seek cheaper alternatives.
Thus, I'd like you to take that into consideration next time, and if other folks would moderate your post into oblivion right now, that might be the best thing that could happen to it. Sorry.
Bruce Perens.
Special encryption software for the financial benefit of Hollywood enshrined in legislation? Perhaps Hollywood should start paying some tax instead of dodging it, sometimes entirely (eg. Forrest Gump) before they have the hide to try and push legislation like this through.
See the above peer rated post. It has a better chance of being read than one of hundreds of pieces of paper shoveled through the mail. I'll bet Jane sees it, and hope that it helps. I'm a little embarassed of calling her a "ninny" for insulting my "religion" but, oh well, such is publication.
Further reflection demands this clarification:
Sharing, openeness and collaboration are good, natural and to be encouraged. They are necessary conditions for their goal: freedom and control. Without knowledge of the workings of your computer, you have no control. Without a community of honest programers sharing code you can have no practical knowledge of those workings. You will either build everything yourself and lose the advantages of peer review, or you can find a reasonable community of users to join. The four simple software freedoms are designed to give users knowledge and control of what their computers are doing. Senator Hollings bills, the DCMA, and other bad laws are diametrically opposed to this goal as they are designed to give control to unknown third parties.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
This is the only possible scheme that would work.
It would do nothing to stop for-money pirates however, as they could likely get access to or steal an "offical" recording machine.
It would put all independent artists out of business, a point that I'm sure the RIAA is considering, though they won't talk about it.
No appologies needed, Mr. Perens, I'm happy to have your input. Indeed, you have helped form my thoughts on such matters.
We do need to explain the issue and we do need brave people like Jane. I'm embarrased to have called her a ninny and admit I was angry when did it. I fear that equating software freedom to embeded consumer devices and watching movies trivializes the issue and makes it less important to the very people we need to influence.
The core issue is simple: with free software, the user understands and controls the computer they own. All other software encroches on this ownership and control to one extent or another. Jane, a journalist, understands the importance of free speech and she should understand the implications of government mandated software on all tools of publication.
The readers of Business Week should also care about the implications of Holling's work. Free speech and privacy have very real practical effects on business. Without free speech, there can be no real journalism. It's hard to make plans without an accurate view of the world. It's also hard to do business without privacy. Business men, more than others care that third parties may monitor their communications and other information that would put them at a competitive disadvantage.
I have not seen others voicing these concerns on this thread. Hopefully, someone will do so more politely and forecfully.
I commend your efforts to educate the world. It is obvious that Jane learned much from you. It is also obvious, howerver, that our enemies are loud, missleading and painting themselves as victims as they encroach on our rights.
My message is simple and I will repeat it as clearly as I can in the face of numbing details. DRM is un-American. In real life, I'm just a simple but more polite.
I wonder if Jane might speak up for herself. Are you out there? My appologies for rudeness, arrogance and what not.
-Twitter, one of 500,000+ slashdotters reading and commenting this little article.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
At least credit Ballard if you're going to post stuff from Crash, a terribly disappointing book from someone whose sci-fi short stories I had quite enjoyed.
I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.
Your comment betrays the sort of fetishism of press that makes market of man and is endemic to the American cult of lucre, counter to the progress of the truth of our position. Sometimes you got to whip the dogs that get you there, Bruce.
Twitter's critique is right on and there is no reason not to lead a rational individual to a more correct understanding of just what's at stake here, particularly one engaged in the noble devoirs of the fourth estate. The mealy-mouthed caterwhauling with which you chide twitter is just what brings us to this pass, eh? It *is* the principle of the thing, Bruce, not the position of it.
illegitimii non ingravare
Thanks
Bruce
Bruce Perens.
Thanks
Bruce
Bruce Perens.
The cameras and microphones are on. Your correspondence will be violated by your government, as will your phone calls without judicial supervision. Your XP EULA gives Microsoft rights to search all of your documents. Recent legislation gives the governemnt unprecedented ability to collect computer records, most damningly they lay claim to all computer records collected by the above mentioned spyware.
Senator Holling's bill, obsensibly to "protect" music and movie publishers, is the final piece of the above puzzle. It gives government the ability to make good on their claims correspondence and information that might otherwise get away from them. It is the ring that binds all of the above and places control firmly in the hands of those who create and approve of the "security" software.
In a fourth amendment framework, you will NOT be secure in your home and personal effects. The government is able to search said effects WITHOUT reasonable cause presented before witnesses in a court of law.
Under such a coercive environment people will obviously NOT be able to say what they think and free speech is lost. Senator Holling's bill has the potential to further that goal by installing censor ware on all digital devices. Why not? Protect music today, public decency and order tomorrow. A little optical character recognition software is all it would take to apply this to photocopiers and other devices in the future. All other rights are lost when the first amendment is thus destroyed.
You can't do this kind of thing to an educated population, so propaganda is pouring forth to reduce privacy expectations of an increasingly ignorant population. Particularly sinister is the notion that somehow digital comunications are insecure and will be monitored. Beyond that, knowledge itself is under attack. What better place to censor things than the local library? Publishers hate libraries too these days. According to the last article, sharing information without paying is a violation of copyright, even reading the book out loud. If you have enough money to buy your own books, you are still out of luck as copyrith law treatens your ability to use your books when and how you please. What, you think publishers will continue the vastly expensive practice of printing on paper? The MPAA has shown them the way to pay per play and shifting formats will insure that you won't be able to access the work later anyway even if you are a very clever lawbreaker. Is that dumb enough for you? I don't need to prove the well known continued decline of national test performance or the lessing expectations of privacy that have been foist on us by the regulated public shcools. It's working!
Whew! That's a lot of reading, but you have to admit that it encompasses much more than pop music, "Plannet of the Apes" and other disposable entertainments. The pieces of the puzzle are all there. We can see where it's going and what's driving it without understanding programing concepts. Just imagine your paper books, TV, and pencil behaved as your DVDs, digiCam and word processor do. Then imagine it getting much worse.
When it all get's too much for you, just comfort yourself with the somewhat archaic, and disregarded text of the Bill of Rights. You don't think I'm sitting here at three AM becuse I don't have anything better to do, do you? I'm doing this because I love my country. OK, I am insane and I can't think of anything better to do.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.