Slashdot Mirror
Rep. Boucher Outlines 'Fair Use' Fight
A reader writes "AtNewYork.com is reporting: U.S. Congressman Rick Boucher, moving to strengthen "fair use" provisions under federal copyright law, said he is introducing a bill that would essentially restrict the record industry from selling copy-protected CDs."
I guess that the RIAA contributions to campaigns to Democrats haven't been high enough lately.
.
send that man a CD Burner!!!
::.. check out some Cell Phone Reviews
He mentioned this in his last interview. It's amazing to me he's actually going through with it.
Liberty.
I would really like to believe it has a chance but knowing how our government tends to work this bill won;t even get voted on.
This guy is a hero!
Daily Shenanigans
"introducing a bill that would essentially restrict the record industry from selling copy-protected CDs."
:D
They can stack them as high as they want. I wont be buying any of them
Do we need a bill to help me decide what to purchase?
----- Whats wrong with this picture? http://www.revoh.org:1234/whatswrong
wether he has DSL or cable at home, and how many mp3s he has on his computer? :-) Personally however I would rather they be allowed to release poor quality CDs until people get so sick of them, they stop buying them. Why force them to release a product that people can actually listen to??? (I don't know how many people have complained about not being able to listen to copy protected CDs on various players......)
I Am My Own Worst Enemy
The Honorable Mr. Boucher will be branded either a nut case or a heretic by the rest of the house.
The wispering in the halls of congress has already begun. "Didn't he get his check from the RIAA yet???"
Hmm.. anyone know Rick Bouchers district/contact info? I would love to write that man a letter.. and I dont mean a bad one, either.
With all the negative feedback congressmen normally get from us, I think it would be a nice change if we actually wrote them something thanking and encouraging them for once...
One of these days i'm going to find this 'peer' guy and reset HIS connection!
I guess that the only solution that americans believe in anymore is to legislate the crap out of everything. Making sure that no independent thought occurs anywhere.
Not that this is all bad, but do we have to legislate what should be common practice by the record companies. The real solution is simple, if you buy a cd that you cannont play and cannot return, call the company that you bought it from and annoy them.
While the bill indicates that this will effect the music industry is there any clause that allows other companies in the computer industry to continue their copy-protection?
Sure, i don't know how he feels on a variety of other issues, but his stand on tech issues makes him president material in my book.
It's not too often that you see a congressman (or any other poltician) going against organizations like the RIAA.
# fuser -v
#
I fail to see how it is a good idea to ban the sales of copy protected CDs. The record comapnies are more than free to sell them as such, and I would hate to see the even more legislation from the government telling companies what they can and can't do, especialy when it is in a situation where no harm can come to the users of the products. The Libertarian in me cringes at this idea.
However, doing something like simply mandating a truth in advertiseing plan, so that CDs that are copy protected are labled as such, and ones that aren't are the only ones that can carry the Compact Disk logo would be a fine comprimise. And would also I think let the market police itself.
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
I love him, and I want to have his babies. I want to be his meat puppet of love.
And the scary bit? I am not joking. This is the one elected representative who gets it, who's prepared to stand up and say so, and is not buying the line that what's good for big shareholders isn't necessary good for us.
The worst part? I'm not a US citizen, and so I'm not supposed to be allowed to donate campaign contributions. And yet, strangely, Hollings can take money from any US business that he likes. I despair.
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
I recently renewed my drivers license, and was asked if I wanted to register to vote. My first instinct was to decline, because I don't feel like I'm informed enough to make a good enough decision regarding my elected officials.
I changed my mind, however, and registered. I'm glad I did. The whole mess with DRM has really opened my eyes to how much big business controls politics nowadays. Representative Boucher is a breath of fresh air in this soap opera, and I applaud his efforts.
But...
I love you Sen. Boucher.
In college, really poor, need a flatscreen.
I think it is good to see SOME sort of recognition of fair use. However this stops short of really saying fair use is a 'right', it is more along the lines of not kicking the ass of people just trying to do fair use stuff. What *I* want to see is some sort of penalty imposed on companies who take measures to restrict fair use in dominant standards, such as DVDs. All these so-called copy protection schemes make the right to exercise fair use a moot point, if successful one cannot exercise these rights. There are already laws in place to cover illegal copying. Of course, currently it isn't econmincally feasible to use that path as they should, so there is an issue... Chasing down the mechanisms that *could* be used for copying is wrong, as is trying to prevent the ability to copy altogether...
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
Here's another article that mentions him.
Citizens of the USA have been plagued for years as to whether wiping their asses should be done from front to back, or back to front. In order to quell this delima, congress enacted the HTWYA (how to wipe your ass) bill, which stipulates that all ass wiping will be done from front to back. They have also demanded that all toilet paper manufactures add safeguards to their toilet paper to ensure there is to be no back to front wiping.
Remember, RIAA and the rest of the Horsemen of the Apocalpse aren't going to stand by. They'll fight this thing with every dollar, lawyer and lying press release they can dream up.
This could be a HUGE momentum swing. Let's take advantage of it...
Computer Science is Applied Philosophy
I am so proud to be from this man's district. It's the only time I ever voted and didn't feel like I was getting the lesser of two evils....The surprising thing is that Boucher is from one of the less technologically inclined corners of Virginia (i.e. not NOVA and not near Jefferson Labs...). And they called us hicks.
If this guy's some kind of changelin'
A Congressman who's not up for sale...
Great! If you live in his district, vote for him! And wherever you live, be sure to write your Congressmen in support of his proposals.
"Do I dare disturb the universe?"
You can't really write law that restricts only a single technology. Even if they did, there is a matter known as the "spirit" of the law which is often more far reaching. This is why we can't restrict the right to free speech of unpopular opinions without endangering our own free speech.
So if they are successful at the "copy protected CD" legislation, the DVDCCA issues are also in danger under such law guaranteeing 'Fair Use' in law. I honestly don't think this action will get too far. The politicians are far too well paid by interests who would prefer to deny Fair Use to their consumers.
If. by some miracle, something preventing such protection is enacted, it could grow into something quite powerful indeed.
A better solution is to restrict the RIAA from using the term "CD" for these so-called "copy protected" discs that break from the red book specification. Pass laws to force the industry to call them "PDs -- protected discs" and let the market forces decide. Maybe Joe Consumer is willing to forego fair use for the right price point?
"I'm just a little perplexed to understand the rationale for this. There
...It's like you don't even know what to say man... ...when they like... ...get it.
will be a very heavy cost that the industry will pay when copy-protected CDs
are introduced," Boucher said.
While conceding later that copy-protected CDs aren't against existing law,
he said their introduction wouldn't even impact the music piracy the music industry is
trying to stop. Instead, the move will "anger millions of their
best-customers who have become accustomed of making copies [of CDs] for
their own use,"
Aha! so his legislating against copy protection to PROTECT the industry. Dammit when are we gonna get some politians who are on our side?
On a more seriours note:
which is allowed under "fair use" provisions of copyright law.
He said he would introduce legislation that would essentially codify
"fair use" provisions of copyright law (that have been implied but not necessarily guaranteed). He also wants to ease up some of the more copy-restrictive provisions of the 1998 Digital Milennium Copyright Act, whose pay-per-use provisions on copies he has criticized as a threat not only to "fair use," but to innovation, idea exchange, even First Amendment guarantees on free speech.
FRA: STFU GTFO
I don't think any new laws are going to fix any of the problems. Look at what's going on with Microsoft lately... Slashdot published a story about the meeting scheduled between the Phoenix Linux Users Group and the Maricopa County CIO to talk about the purchasing guidelines and potential for Open Source, but it looks like Maricopa County won't be "disbarring" Microsoft as a supplier, despite the clear legality of doing so after Microsoft's lost legal battles on the "monopoly" front.
After about two hours (8:30AM to 10:30AM) I left the meeting with a much better feeling about my local County government - at least in the IT/IS groups.
Linden Thatcher, the CIO for Maricopa County, struck me as quite literate in the issues that were raised.
About 5% of the County IT/IS budget goes to Microsoft products, a vast majority of those being the 12,000 desktops they support. According to the statements Mr. Thatcher made, most of their "server-side" applications run on a mix of HP-UX and System V, with some apps running on Websphere.
There are currently a couple of internal projects running Linux/Apache to provide document publishing.
Mr. Thatcher has read "Ender's Game," and met Orson Scott Card (thank goodness we've got SOMEONE in the hierarchy who is not only literate, but READS!)
The Phoenix Linux Users Group people who showed up were very polite, and there was only one person in the crowd who seemed to be almost violently "anti-Microsoft."
Good meeting. But I still don't have any hopes that new laws are going to fix any of these problems.
Specialization is for insects. - R.A.H.
I wonder how far this proposed legislation will go to protect the technology used to make "Fair Use" rights a reality? It seems like the DMCA and the CBDTPA both are aimed not at the "Fair Use" rights themselves but aimed at outlawing the technology that allows us the ability to exercise those rights. The RIAA and the MPAA have been allowed to have their cake and eat it to by saying that they support "Fair Use" but pushing for legislation that makes the vehicle for exercising those rights illegal.
Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.
Of course the paid-off RIAA congressmen will make short work of this, but I admire the atempt nonetheless.
Free Mac Mini Yeah, it's
We also sue the pants off of anyone who doesn't do exactly what we want, whether or not what actually happened was agreed to beforehand. God bless America!
Send that man some campaign contributions!
What event wasn't included in the purchase?
My concern is with the kind of transaction record companies are making with consumers. When you buy a CD, are you buying the physical product, or are you buying a license to listen to the music?
If we're buying the right to listen to the music, then we should be able to listen to in in other forms, MP3, etc.
If we're buying the physical product, then the RIAA shouldn't be trying to tax record stores on sales of used albums.
Basically, they can't have it both ways.
the mot disturbing thing though is the ambiguity. There's no EULA to clickthrough or read, and I doubt the average consumer knows whether they're buying a CD, or buying the music on the CD. It makes a big difference.
Kevin Fox
A politician that works for morals and ethics rather than dollars? Could it really be?
Outdoor digital photography, mostly in New Engl
Just when I thought that everyone in Congress slept through law school, I see that someone there has heard of the term "Fair use." Too bad they'll eventually vote this bill down.
Although I am all for letting the users (buyers / market) to decide whether or not something is worth to be purchased, methinks it will be a VERY BAD LAW if there is any restriction on the selling of the "copy-protected" CDs.
Why ?
Simply because, in the spirit of "FAIR USE", the producers of the CDs should have the right to enjoy the "FAIR USE" of the technology employed in the "copy protected CD".
The only thing that I think is important in all these things is that THERE SHOULD NOT BE ANY LAW PROHIBITING ANYONE FROM rendering the very technology that have been employed in the "copy protection" scheme useless.
And that's the gist of DCMA - it makes EVERYTHING, or EVERY IDEA of creating NEW TECHNOLOGIES making existing ones useless ILLEGAL.
Copy-protected CDs are NOT the culprit. It's the BAD LAW (DCMA and friends) that is hurting everyone.
One bad law doesn't deserve another. We have enough bad laws already.
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
D-Virginia.
Hopefully, you browse at -1 like I do.
If you fall off a building, go real limp, because maybe you'll look like a dummy and people will be like hey, free dummy
In the article, I found the following paragraph rather interesting:
While conceding later that copy-protected CDs aren't against existing law, he said their introduction wouldn't even impact the music piracy the music industry is trying to stop. Instead, the move will "anger millions of their best-customers who have become accustomed of making copies [of CDs] for their own use," which is allowed under "fair use" provisions of copyright law.
So, if indeed they are angering millions of their best-customers, then why does he need a law. Seems logical that by doing this they will be hurting their own bottom line, and thus will be disincented to do it. Having said that, I'm happy to see this kind of legislation because I think copyright is getting sorely out of balance.
I have been fortunate in that my obscure taste in music has kept me away from CD's with copy protection schemes. If I do someday pick up a CD with a protection scheme, then I will handle it very simply.
I will rip it as I do with every CD to 192Kbps MP3. If it fails I'll spend some time trying to find hacks that will get it to rip successfully. If no hacks solve it, then I will return the media as unusable and demand my money back. If the label doesn't want my money, I'll just go find other musicians to listen to, thanks. If they all go to unbreakable copy protection systems (hahaha!), then I'll just hum along with the voices in my head I guess.
If they don't want to sell me music in the form that I listen to I guess I just won't listen anymore.
This sig has been temporarily disconnected or is no longer in service
I don't know about the reporter, but the senator is definitely a democrat. He represents southwestern VA, which is one of the most economically underdeveloped regions of the state.
Does anyone know where I can learn how much money my elected representatives have received from the RIAA, MPAA, and other pro-DMCA companies? I'd like to write letters to my Congressmen asking them to support Boucher's bill, but I want to include this financial information to let them know that I know.
And the men who hold high places must be the ones who start
To mold a new reality... closer to the heart
We need to support this man!
You can find his statement on Fair Use here
And his official web site can be found here
Phoenix
[...]
Allow back up copies of music on a hard drive, much the way software copies are backed up in case a computer hard-drive has to be rebuilt. Under existing law, users can't back up music they download with, say, RealJukebox software, although they can back up the software itself.
I hope this means scrapping that awful idea to make hardware and operating systems a requirement, which inhibit reading or copying music/video. I just got an MP3 player in the p/u this weekend and want to be able to rip and burn from my considerable investment in CD's and listen to them as I travel. I'm concerned about having to buy a drive before I'm ready for one, just in ensure I'll be able to do so later.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
Rick Boucher - Virginia-9th, Democrat
Committess
* Committee on Energy and Commerce
* Committee on the Judiciary
Sub-committees
* Courts, the Internet, and Intellectual Property (Judiciary)
* Energy and Air Quality (Energy and Commerce)
* Telecommunications and the Internet (Energy and Commerce)
I never even heard of the NetCaucus but he seems to be majorly involved with Internet and Government. Wonder who else is belongs to this caucus and "Gets It"...
Copy-protected CDs don't hold up their end of the bargain because the work can't go into the public domain (more likely, it will simply become inaccessible after a few years as the DRM technology changes). Therefore, any content published on copy-protected CDs should not be subject to copyright protection: if people break the copy protection, they should be able to redistribute the content freely.
The legal power and protection of copyright should be reserved for content that is actually published and that will eventually be able to fall into the public domain.
I fail to see how it is a good idea to ban the sales of copy protected CDs. The record comapnies are more than free to sell them as such, and I would hate to see the even more legislation from the government telling companies what they can and can't do, especialy when it is in a situation where no harm can come to the users of the products.
For the same reason the electronics industry is restricted from selling equipment which blacks out the radio reception in an entire building or neighborhood, or will tend to overheat wiring and start fires.
Copy protected CDs destroy expensive equipment, such as Macintosh computers and some high-end CD players. Banning their sale is minimalistic Consumer Protection, something is country is in sore need of, and something which is utterly appropriate for the government to be doing. Not everyone can be an expert on everything.
However, doing something like simply mandating a truth in advertiseing plan
I too would very much like to see a return to Truth in Advertising. Unfortunately, the courts have ruled the corporations are the same as living, breathing human beings, with all of their rights (but none of their vulnerabilities). This has been explicitly extended to include freedom of speech that is no more restricted than individual speech (go figure), so there is little if anything that can be done to coerce a company, much less a cartel, into not misrepresenting their incompatible disks as CDs.
If they want to sell a new, incompatible medium, they should be required to change its physical format such that it cannot accidentally be put into equipment it will damage. Requiring such disks to be 6" in diameter, instead of 4.5", for example, woud probably be sufficient.
The Compact Disk logo is a trademark issue, but frankly it is too subtle for most consumers to recognize, so while Phillips will likely not allow such copy protected CD-resembling media to bear their logo, the customer will likely only become aware of that discrepency after their incompatible drive has refused to play the music they purchased (at best), or has been damaged or destroyed by the disk.
This is not acceptable, and I am frankly amazed that anyone could argue that caveate emptor would be at all an acceptable standard of behavior, much less regulation, for something like this.
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
We all saw what writing your representative can do with that sssca bill (can't remeber it's second name) getting rejected. Lets see if our support can work in the opposite direction.
Just like everyone in Congress and Senate, except for Rep. Ron Paul. We need Congressional Representatives that hold the rachet of big government back. This guy is taking one step forward for ever 5 steps that the other laws he votes for takes.
Stop congratulating yourself. Vote libertarian, and let's return this country to a free and artistically open country, rather than one that caters to big business.
Campaign finance reform will only make big business stronger. The only way to protect our rights and keep business out of it is to elect representatives with a backbone -- ones that know that THE POWER OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IS LIMITED.
The correlary to this view is that copyright law (which extends all the way back to the US Constitution) was established primarily to protect those who create and distribute creative works. In fact, it was created as a compact between average citizens and those citizens or organizations that were provided with copyright protections.
The underlying goal of this compact was to strengthen the culture of the United States for all its citizens. The underlying goal was never to provide special protections for copyright holders in some sort of vacuum of privelege.
Interestingly, in their primer on copyright, the RIAA neglects this vial information. As usual, they cite the rights of the copyright holder, without pointing out that those rights are mirrored by specific and explicit rights given to the general public as part of the copyright compact.
The RIAA essentially constitutes a cartel, and as such when they decide to endorse computer-damaging CDs or other nonsense, it's not simply a matter of consumer choice. Unopposed, the RIAA will get what it wants. What it wants in this case is to deny you and me the right to exercise our end of the copyright compact.
As we're seeing now with WorldCom, Enron, et. al., even though the Congress is generally overly-lenient with big business, from time to time the politicians realize that it's in nobody's best interests for these people to be given free rein.
I for one am happy to see at least one member of Congress who is willing to stand up and make this an issue. Cynics will call it grandstanding, or proof that he didn't get enough money from the music industry, and so on. But I see it as proof that the American political system can work.
As others have pointed out, it's not enough to steal songs via Limewire all day in a "protest" against the RIAA. Sometimes you have to *gasp* get to know the issues, vote *double gasp* and stop whining that the system doesn't work.
Read the EFF's Fair Use FAQ
http://www.house.gov/boucher/docs/fairusespeech.ht m
This guy gets it:
"Let's talk about a couple of fair use rights that are infringed by virtue of this provision. If you go today to a rental store, and you rent a DVD, you can bring it home, and if you want to use it on your computer, and you happen to have a Linux operating system on your computer, you will find that the DVD does not play -- at least unless they have changed the encryption technology since the last time I checked.
Now, you can go down to the college bookstore and buy a t-shirt that has the code on it for bypassing the encryption technology on the DVD. You don't have to do anything unlawful in order to get a hold of that information. Just go buy a t-shirt down at the college bookstore. But, if you use that information, in order to conduct a lawful act, or let's say, a harmless act, and that is, bypassing this technology, so that your DVD will play on your Linux operating system, you have committed a crime. You have circumvented a technological protection measure that guards access to copyrighted work. It is harmless conduct. The copyright owner is not injured by what you have done. But that is a criminal offense."
And more! Go read!
Here is my email to him, have you sent one yet?
--------
I am a computer professional who lives in Central Upstate New York. I just wanted to let you know I have been very impressed with the views you have expressed recently regarding fair use of recorded music, and CARP.
In addition, I am strongly against many of the restrictions imposed by the DMCA, and am in favor the the modifications you propose. The current DMCA has very little to do with protecting copyright and very much to do with having absolute and complete control over the consumer. Without correction, I believe we are on a course to a world where we are unable to possess a copy of any digital IP, and will be charged every time we want to access it. This is very anti-consumer, and has nothing to do with the reasons "limited" copyright was ever granted.
I would like to thank you for the views you are expressing, and would like to let you know I support you in what I have heard so far. I look forward to reading your soon to be proposed legislation. I will most likely be writing my representatives in support when the bill is released and numbered.
I wish you represented my district so that I could give you my vote next time around.
-signature with complete mailing address-
Soccer Goal Plans
THANK YOU!
The problem is of course, that the OP won't have a clue what you're talking about.
When "effect" is used as a verb, it has the meaning of "to bring about". So, the OP said that it would create the industry. Hence Synapse's response. The verb meaning "to cause a change in", would be "affect".
Instead of telling what recording labels can and cannot do with their property (as long as the WAAAY too long copyright lasts) why not just repeal laws against bypassing the copy protection. That doesn't change the fact that spreading the music without permission and against the principles of "fair use" would still be illegal, but anyone would be free to build and sell a CD player or software that could rip the protected tracks. Support truth in labelling and let the market sort it out.
The government has no place in mandating, protecting, controlling, or subsidizing copy controls or their lack of use.
Bryan Baskin
I just wanted to point out that here's someone that looks like a decent individual, who is not beholden to the RIAA, and since we know that he won't be getting a big check from them, he could probably use some campaign support. I don't live in his district, but you can contribute to Congressman Boucher's re-election campaign at http://www.boucherforcongress.com
It's obvious Sen. Boucher fails to understand that the RIAA's undertaking steps to protect American CDs from copyright infringment is a thoughtful action by the responsible corporate sector of our economy toward preventing terrorists from profiting from the piracy trade. They're acting in our best interests, can't you all see that? Boucher and the rest of you rabble-rousers should get out of the way and let our congress, the administration and the corporate sector protect our country before another attack occurs.
The only tool you've got against psychosis is experience.
If it were the case that they are selling you a license to listen to a particular CD(whithout the ability to backup) then the price of CD's is FAR TO HIGH.
Did you know.....
A major record lable(mgm) is withdrawing music in the UK charts~(elvis Vs JXL in order to increase the chart raiting of a new release(kiddy pop)
Well here's the story
thank God the internet isn't a human right.
Actually, it's not a troll, it's rather true:
m =1&q=http://news.com.com/2100-1023-942180.html%3Ft ag%3Dcd_mh
http://www.google.com/url?sa=X&oi=news&start=0&nu
Assassinated by the RIAA hit men perhaps?!
I don't know how this didn't make /. but BGM are apparently withdrawing stock of 'Elvis V JXL' (currently high in the UK charts) to boost a 'kiddie pop' record in the charts.
thank God the internet isn't a human right.
Actually, the real culprit is the stranglehold that the music industry has on the consumers. People willingly let themselves be sheep, and I have no problem with that, but when the bad guys start affecting my choice by killing off the good guys, then they are overstepping their bounds. The music industry has done just so for years.
Grumble, Grumble
Keep an eye out for it and post when you find out the bill number and perhaps the name. We can't tell our Congressmen and Senators how to vote if we can't tell them what it is we want them to vote for.
Tech Public Policy stuff
I'm really happy about what this guy wants to do, but I ache for a little more. I really like what DigitalConsumer.org suggests. Basically, they outline our 'rights' as 'digital consumers'. If this were passed into law, then our rights are clearly defined.
The benefit of this is that a 'pirate' is much easier to identify. If the law says 'we can media shift', then burning MP3's to CD is legal. You're not a 'pirate' then, like the RIAA is trying to say you are.
I'm happy he's requesting modifications to the DMCA, but it's not as far reaching as I hoped. What about the MPAA? What about downloading DivX versions of movies I have on DVD? Personally, I don't see how the RIAA can really do anything to stop unauthorized use of content until the Gov't defines specifically what we can do.
I wrote Rep. Boucher a while back to tell him how pleased I am that a Congressman is finally standing up for consumer's fair use rights. While some have argued in the past that explicitly defining 'fair use' may open up some loopholes later down the road, as technology progresses, leaving it undefined right now makes it legal for the recording industry to continue to sandbag its customers.
However, I've taken a look at what Boucher is proposing, and it's ambitious. It covers a lot of ground. Admittedly, these are topics that do need to be addressed, but the more you cram into one piece of legislation, the more ammunition you give its opponents. I worry that a select few pieces of this bill might face such strong opposition that the bill itself gets plowed into the dirt.
Of course, I'm just being rationally pessimistic. I truly hope this goes through; it will be a step in the right direction.
No. A vote for a Democrat or a Republican is a wasted vote. Why?
You know that a Democrat or a Republican will only vote for a few things you want, and a bunch of things that you don't want. They never follow a strict regiment of careful voting.
When you vote for a Libertarian, you are saying "I WANT LESS GOVERNMENT." "I WANT LESS TAXES." "I WANT MORE RIGHTS, MORE PRIVACY, AND MORE RESPONSIBILITY."
Libertarians swing votes in local elections, even at the state level (the governor's race in Illinois is highly contested, and the Libertarian may swing that vote). Our vote counts because it scares the bejesus out of the party who lost, as well as the party who won. The vote says there are people out there who want smaller government. With time, and with more voters, it'll make both parties stand up and realize that big government will help them lose elections.
Last year I met an average of 30 people a week who say "I won't vote Libertarian because its a wasted vote." I started a mailing list of these people. I also asked them to get their friends on the mailing list who said the same thing. In less than 9 months, we're 6000 strong. That's just people who were afraid to vote Libertarian because they were afraid of wasting their vote. Now, we're finding that we're much stronger together than we ever were apart.
I recommend the same for you. Afraid of wasting your vote? Get together at the local libertarian meetings. Bring your friends. You'll see its not a wasted vote.
Voting for the status quo is a wasted vote. Both only make government bigger, more intrusive, and cater to big business. Even the greens do that! Only one party wants to take the axe to government spending and growth.
before and i will say it again:
:)
I think this guy is one of the few we have in Congress that "get it" and IMHO one of the few in Congress not paid for by a major media conglomerate.
Although this is going to sound like a political commercial, I have followed this guys record, he has opposed virtually every fascist piece of legislation pushed by "big media".
I believe the linux and free software community should support him just like most of us support the EFF.
I went to the RIAA website to see what was their respone was and there was nothing much on the Boucher legislation. But there was this interesting link which to an article from the Philly papers. Obviously the RIAA Mafia didn't read the article before posting the link, because if they did, they never wood have posted it. Tom Moon suggests that the record labels reduce the cost of CDs, stop selling CDs that won't play on computers, etc. Could RIAA be their own worst enemy?
Some people have a way with words, others not have way.
I mean who's paying for this law. I think we should be told. Unless it is transparent and can be called industry assistance, for some reasson people think corruption is a very bad thing and should be stopped.
When the industry started talking copy protection, his question to them was "then we can get rid of the tax on blank CDRs right?"
Wish I lived in VA and could vote for this man in the next election. It's about time someone "got it" like Rick does.
I don't know if anyone has mentioned this, but music CD's, in the end, contain music - and they can never stop people from copying it unless it cannot be heard completely - which then defies the whole purpose in the first place. Sure, it's harder to rig up a recording system compared to sticking it into the computer and ripping it, but it can be done, relatively easily - without huge compromises in the quality.
I am unique, just like you, and you, and you...
Similarly, there is nothing wrong with copy-protected CDs from a legal standpoint (IANAL). I don't think it's a good idea, and I think it will definately hurt the RIAA's sales, but that doesn't change the fact that the RIAA are entirely justified in choosing the formats in which they want to distribute.
Boucher for UberGeek (aka President)
When that becomes law, maybe I can enjoy music again instead of what is the case right now: every time when I hear music, I get irritated knowing that it's the record companies pushing the same 7 songs for the last 10 weeks on all stations. And all the other things they are doing wrong, webcasters, copy prevention, anti-mp3, buying laws, DMCA, SCCCA. No wonder MTV doesn't broadcast music anymore, they are right!
Then I see Austin Powers smacking BSpears in an ad and that makes me happy for a second, until I realize he is a representative of the mpaa, controlled by an almost equally irritating bunch of suits. But at least the mpaa gives me digital cable with a gazillion movie channels without commercials and with more movies than I want to watch for a rate that I find only slightly (200%) overpriced. And nice rollercoasters in the themeparks, and they promised ren and stimpy back.
The riaa doesn't have the equivalent for music yet, no, instead they litigate against those that try to set something like that up, and then purposely start a way overpriced service with too much restrictions (such as max 200 songs) with not even all music that I want to listen to. And then they don't even give the low-volume artists a chance (they prefer bspears and other space-flying debree), let alone compensate them fairly for their creativity.
</rant><rant type=continuation>
If it were up to riaa/mpaa, this rant would be followed by a smallprint such as this:
"This rant is (C) Copyright 2002 by AC, a Mr Marcello company, subsidiary of BS corp.
All rights reserved. Copying or Lending prohibited. Unauthorized duplication is a violation of applicable laws. Use of this rant will require a license. License fee is seven firstborn children per use, that will be distributed to their biological parents after the AC-P/IAA deducts their 99.9% operating rights. A nontransferable unrestricted unlimited use license for this rant is hereby given at no cost to AC parent holding company slashdot.org but nobody else unless they get a brown nose with us."
</rant>
Now mod this offtopic. This is waaay over the edge man. This guy obviously needs to get laid soon, he can't be serious.
This guy wouldn't happen to be related to Jello Biafra (aka Eric Boucher) would he?
Somewhere, something incredible is waiting to be known. -- Carl Sagan
We need a bi-partisan effort to get this bill through.
...I've changed my .SIG.
Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power multiplied.
I've met him. A politician with a clue is a rare thing. Let's not lose him . . . .
All the single-issue voters out there.. We have Barbara Lee for the closet Communists, Sheila Jackson Lee for all the whiners who think they became a victim automatically when they were born black.. etc
Geez, they've got this simple, completely legal method of copy-protection that works well and also improves their product. People buy CDs, not music. It feels good to spend your money on something you can hold in your hand. Just make the packaging cool, and people will be way more likely to buy a CD rather than copy it. For instance, Kid Koala's CD "Karpal Tunnel Syndrome" comes with a goddam comic book! You don't even have to go all out. Kruder & Dorfmeister's "K & D Sessions" has beautiful photography and a gorgeous fold-out mini poster of a sunflower field. Why don't the record companies issue a memo to all the artists that says "Put some freakin effort into your packaging. No more will we accept a few glamour shots of the band. We need to make the physical CD a work of art, like the music inside, so the public will buy it."
c-hack.com |
"...I am pleased to rise today in support of the passage of H.R. 2281, which will extend new protections against the theft of their works to copyright owners."
To see the full text of his DMCA speech:
DIGITAL MILLENNIUM COPYRIGHT ACT (House of Representatives - August 04, 1998)
Mr. BOUCHER. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Frank) for yielding this time to me, and I am pleased to rise today in support of the passage of H.R. 2281, which will extend new protections against the theft of their works to copyright owners.
Madam Speaker, new protections are needed due to the ease with which flawless copies of copyrighted materials can both be made and transmitted in the digital network environment. Essential, however, to the creation of new guarantees for copyright owners is the retention of the traditional rights of the users of intellectual property. A balance has always existed in our law between these conflicting interests, and the major challenge in the writing of this legislation is to assure that no fundamental altering of that delicate balance takes place.
Another challenge is to ensure that in the effort to eliminate devices that are designed and produced to make illegal copies of copyrighted materials, that legitimate consumer electronics products are not also placed in a category of legal uncertainty.
Today I want to offer congratulations primarily to the Members of the House Committee on Commerce who have devoted long hours in the effort to assure that these challenges are met. Specifically, the Committee on Commerce has added provisions that protect personal privacy by clearly permitting personal computer owners to disable cookies that are placed on their disks by others; that allow the encryption research that will lead to a new generation of trusted and secure systems; that give equipment manufacturers the certainty that their consumer electronics products need not affirmatively accommodate all technological protection measures; and that creative procedure for assuring the continuation of the fair use rights of the American public, a procedure that will prevent material that is generally available today under fair use being locked away in a pay-per-use regime in future years.
[TIME: 1400]
Report language also specifies that the technological protection measure circumvention restrictions will not apply when manufacturers, retailers and technicians need to make adjustments to devices to ensure that their performance is not degraded as a consequence of the installation of a technological protection measure. These changes, taken together, significantly improve the original legislation.
The gentleman from Virginia (Chairman Bliley), the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell), the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Klug), the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Stearns) and the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey), among others, deserve thanks for their successful efforts to create new copyright protections, while ensuring that traditional user rights are not undermined.
The Committee on Commerce has, in the manner for which it is known, mastered the intricate details of this complex subject and has produced a balanced result. I want to offer my congratulations to all who have been involved in that outstanding effort.
It is my pleasure to urge passage of H.R. 2281.
Madam Speaker, I will insert in the record correspondence from the subcommittee chairman, the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Coble), to the gentleman from California (Mr. Campbell) and myself, which further defines the terminology that is used in the statute.
I can't seem to get to the site...
:)
You don't think we slashdotted a government server did we
As Lessig has pointed out in "The Future of Ideas," Sen. Orrin Hatch has his head screwed on right when it comes to intellectual property issues. So, will Orrin Hatch join Boucher in supporting this measure? I'd certainly hope so.
That would give the bill two sponsors, one from each party, which is good.
Also, for those of you "Libertarians" saying that banning the sale of copy-protected CD's is bad, I think you're forgetting that the public has rights too. Fair use is a right. The government shoud act so as to preserve our rights. In some cases, it is necessary for the government to interfere with business in order to protect the public's rights and consumer's rights. This is not a violation of the libertarian principal.
What amazes me about some so-called "Libertarians" is how much they despise it when the government disrespects our rights, but how easily and readily they are willing to allow businesses to violate our rights.
The Amendments to the constitution may have been designed by the Founders with concern that the government may violate our rights. However, they didn't mean for the Amendments to only apply to the government. They couldn't have predicted a time when companies would be able to violate our rights just as easily as the government, but they would not have approved. Nor would they approve any-more of individual's violating other individual's rights. The Amendments should protect us from actions by the government, businesses, and other citizens.
Certainly, the founding father's would not approve of our current bounty-hunter system, whereby simply because a bounty-hunter is not "part of the government," (s)he can violate the rights of the suspect.
Nor would they approve of companies and corporate organizations like the RIAA/MPAA/BSA violating our rights.
social sciences can never use experience to verify their statemen
If you support Rep. Boucher's ideas, you should help support his re-election campaign. http://www.boucherforcongress.com/ He's running against this loser carpetbagger Jay Katzen that doesn't even live in that freakin congressional district. Katzen ran for Lt. Governor last year, and I can assure you that his ideas are the absolute exact opposite of Rick Boucher's.
If I lived in Virginia, I would vote for this dude, even tho he IS a democrat.
If anyone has any links to previous stories on this guy, feel free to post.
Gee this was an intelligent comment.
Thanks for the clear explanation as to how and why Rep. Boucher is "as much as an idiot as the rest."
NOT.
Most people here seem to agree that this is "a good thing" and I second that opinion. I wonder, though, if by extention of this one can hope that they'll "get it" when it comes to the subject of encrypting DVDs and (as they'd like to do) HDTV transmissions? One can hope. It's odd that he's focusing on copy protected CDs, which is a relatively recent development, where as copy protected DVDs have been around since day one (5 years). What's the difference, logically? For that matter, what about copy protected VHS tapes (ala Macrovision)? Why, suddenly, does it matter that they're doing it to CDs? I'm not sure I get it, but that's our government for ya!
The important thing heer is to let your own congressman know how much you support Boucher's efforts. And then proceed to ask him what he has done to understand the issues involved here.
And let him know that if he stands with you on this you'll support his campaign (in whatevver ways u can)
Makes me want to switch to Democrat...almost... =) Check out a letter that he wrote to the RIAA... http://www.house.gov/boucher/docs/riaaletter.htm
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Boucher's top contributor was VeriSign? I'm not sure how to feel about that...
Why bother.
It's pretty simple from a plain economic view. People make bootleg copies when the legit ones are too expensive. Stop the price-fixing and so-called "piracy" will evaporate overnight. Would Napster ever have become popular if full-length albums were $4 on CD and $2 online in a lossless format? Not likely. Would street vendors be peddling movies if legit copies were $5? Heck, would anybody even rent movies if they were that cheap to buy? And imagine if all profits from album sales went to the artists. This is what we need to aim for--not a half-hearted set of fair-use guidelines for the current overpriced content that exists today. Furthermore, we need a sort of "anti-DMCA" that requires all copyrighted works to be plaintext and entirely unprotected by copy controls. But alas, hollywood has decided that they should set ridiculously high prices to make room for several unneeded middlemen. And in defense of these high prices, they've pushed for more legislation in attempt to rein in control of the disgruntled masses. This is not what copyright was intended to be.
Read my lips, Boucher. No new laws.
-todd
If aspiration is a virtue, achievement cannot be a vice.
I can't since I am Canadian although I will still praise the work he is doing since I know it will directly affect me since Canadians get the same merchandise as the Americans
Gotta look at all the angles. If I was a paranoid conspiricy theorist, I would suspect that Boucher is a Hollings lapdog.
I would think that this is just throwing the criminal element (anyone who opposes Big Brother) a bone to distract them from the MIB coming over the back fence.
I think hell just froze.
Ready are you? What know you of ready? For eight hundred years have I trained Jedi. - Yoda
In fact, you disgust me so much, that I will start campaigning this very minute for the "Censor Com2Kid Campaign" or CCC. I do not believe that anything you say could be considered speech. I mean you can't argue coherently with it, you can't read it without flinching, and all you do is spew garbage.
Vote CCC, and lets Censor this filthy Com2Kid!
I'll never by another BMG CD again if Gareth-Gap-Tooth-Gates gets into the No. 1 spot because of this.
In fact I may have to go and start buying as many copies of some other single as I can, just to try and stop him. Little git he is, and his manager is a bastard, and BMG can FOAD.
Anyone want to bet a 100 dollars that a horrible freedom-limiting clause will be piggybacked along the law-making process ?
echo '[q]sa[ln0=aln80~Psnlbx]16isb572CCB9AE9DB03273snlbxq' |dc
Email is definitely the way to go. Fax is second best; physical mail gets tied up in decontamination procedures.
I'm going to model my email on yours, and I'll go one step further. I'll email my own representative and senators, pointing out that I would like them to support Boucher on this, and that I'll be watching for results.
BTW, the Senate has a nice site for finding contact info on your senators, and the House has an online email form.
Laws that restrict consumer fair-use options are bad. A law prohibiting record companies from selling protected media isn't as bad (from my point of view) but is unnecessary.
What copy protection scheme has been invented that hasn't been embarrassingly and quickly subverted? From the DeCSS teenager to the scotch-tape beating CD copy-protection, we've seen over and over that these schemes don't work and probably hurt sales.
Why give the record companies a straw man to attack?
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I like the way that Jefferson man thinked. Maybe he could write up a few guidelines on how to run a democracy?
The reason the why certain elements of the far right say "founding fathers" is because they don't want to open the can of worms you get when you actually start quoting Franklin, Jefferson, and Adams. None of these cats are the types the far right want you to emulate. Particularly Jefferson...
The quote used at the Jefferson memorial: "I have sworn upon the altar of god, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man. is part of a larger quote against the clergy opposing his presidency. Which is bizarre, because that's the quote that all types of people use to justify all types of actions (E.g. Oliver North, poster child for the right wing, used this quote to justify his actions in Iran-Contra.)
The only other founding father IMHO that is deserving of more respect is Benjamin Franklin. In addition to being a statesman and a patriot, he was also an inventor (bifocals, the franklin stove, lightning as an electical phenomenon), and was a successful organizer of the Postal Service, the University of Pennsylvania, and the first american Fire Department. Talk about public service.
My father is a blogger.
this peckerwood is obviously Tipper Gore in disguise. Somebody please fuck her correctly.
His best point was when he said that copy-protected CDs will only anger the consumers, although I can't think of anyone who likes the RIAA. Those who don't already hate them probably will if the copy-protected CD's become standard. People are going to copy music and give it to their friends, where was this back in the 80's when mix tapes were all the rage? It's the same thing. The internet is merely a faster facilitator of music swapping.
Actually, it was one of the jobs of the port authorities in Roman days to board and search arriving ships for books (among other things). The books would be "borrowed" and scribes would duplicate the book for the local library. This is part of how the Library of Alexandria became such a great repository of knowledge.
Roman Law did not have copyright rules. The author of a book worked out a deal with the publisher, and the publisher would scribe as many copies as he could before releasing the book. Once it was on the market, anybody could duplicate it, and did. In an age where perhaps 15% of the population could read, this was good enough.
Pacifist paratroopers yell, "Ghandi!" when they jump.
Here's the Zeropaid news comment on this headline: http://www.zeropaid.com/news/articles/auto/0709200 2f.php
Geek - A carnival performer whose show consists of bizarre acts, such as biting the head off a live chicken.
;-)
Nerd - A small humanoid creature looking comically angry, like a thin, cross Chester A. Arthur.
You know, for a bunch of people who "misuse" these words regularly to describe themselves, you sure do get upset over "pirate". English is a LIVING language. Get with the program.
:::The Spear in the heart of the Other is the Spear in the heart of You; You are He - Surak of Vulcan:::
I think we need a copy of Rep. Boucher around. Up here in Canada, we already have a far too restrictive levy on blank media which benefits our equivalent of the RI/MPAA, and it's kind of a pain to be paying these folks so I can put my files on CD-R to send them to my project boss... grr...
We could also use a copy of Dennis Kucinich around, although (to me) an imperfect copy that would respect the law here in Canada that keeps religious ideology off people's reproductive organs would be better.
But you can't have everything, so the least I can do is hope some people grow spines in the near future.
On the other hand, had I US citizenship (they don't, for some reason, seem to listen to foreign nationals), I would be writing to all the appropriate people. I'm nevertheless concerned, because US policy seems to be a bellweather for trends here at home.
I'm not a geek, I'm just a clever script.
I realize this is a little off-topic, but I felt it necessary to try to showcase a little better who the man behind the article is.
Not many of you may really know who Boucher is, heck, I admit that I would be unable to write even a small biography on the man without a lot of hard work. However, this guy is perhaps one of the few folk in Congress who really understands and cares about what the Internet is and what it can become.
While most politicians can be seen as either paying lip service about Internet freedoms or attacking outright the freedoms guaranteed to us, Boucher has proven time and time again that there politicians out there who, for the most part, look out for us.
Now, I'm not in his district and I couldn't vote for him even if I wanted to. He's never seen a dime of my money and I have never even so much have written an email or letter to him. Hell, I'm not even a Democrat. However, this man is perhaps one of the few people whom we need to encourage to continue to fight for our rights. Likewise, we need to begin encouraging our own representatives to follow his lead.
It may sound like I'm bullshitting you about this and that I have some ulterior motive. I don't. I'll let his record speak for itself,
http://www.house.gov/boucher/internet.htm
Anyway, I don't post on Slashdot anymore unless I really have something to say. All I'm trying to say now is, "take a look at this guy, see what he's about, what he's done and decide for yourself."
As a closing thought as to what kind of vision this guy has, he was the one back in 1992 that allowed the NSF (National Science Foundation) network to carry non-educational or scientific traffic... i.e., commodity Internet traffic. This effectively made the Internet what it is today. Al Gore and others may claim they invented the Internet. Boucher makes no such claim, but could largely be credited with the one that made it legal to become what it is today.
Anywho, I'll get off the podium now... but when someone does something right by me I want to make sure everyone who has an interest knows so. This guy is the real deal. Support him and tell your representatives to support him. He is truly "our man on the inside".
"... it is a "product" that was essentially created by legislative fiat." Not worth the paper it's printed on...just like the greenback!
Outlawing copy protection would be a good thing, but the article mentions something else that would be even better: Require direct payment to artists:
Voting for the status quo is a wasted vote. Both only make government bigger, more intrusive, and cater to big business. Even the greens do that!
The Greens cater to big business? How on earth do you figure that? Please climb down from the soapbox and provide an example, if such an example exists.
If anything, the Green party has a reputation about being the antithesis of big business because they are not willing to sacrifice the planet for the sake of a few grubby dollars.
I fail to see how the Libertarian philosophy has any relevance in the global village we all live in today. Such provincialism is quaint, but rather out-of-step with the real world...
*** Where are we going? And what's with this handbasket?
http://www.worldtechtribune.com/worldtechtribune/a sparticles/buzz/bz07092002.asp