Slashdot Mirror
MPAA vs. Television
Today brings several articles on the MPAA's attempt to create a "broadcast flag" to kill home recording of broadcast television. Lunenburg writes "Apparently too impatient to implement the Broadcast Flag in digital media through legislative means, both Sen. Hollings and Rep. Tauzin have both sent letters to FCC Chairman Michael Powell urging him to mandate the implementation of the Broadcast Flag under FCC rules, according to the EFF's Consensus at Lawyerpoint blog." There's a CNet story about a presentation given by the MPAA to pro-business lobbying groups, and a MSNBC story about digital video recorders.
As if there wasn't a fairly good chance that HDTV adoption was doomed before.
It's just Macrovision for broadcast, basically; the MPAA notes that "legislation would be required", and that's because without it manufacturers or third parties will quickly develop means of circumventing the protection. Of course, whatever happens, there *will* be the means of recording any broadcast stream -- these people need to recognise that, if it's human-recognisable, it's machine-recordable. All that's achieved by these kind of nonsensical restictions is a) increased costs for the manufacturers, which lead to b) increased costs for the consumer, and c) a less satisfactory user experience. But that media will continue to be recorded, nobody should have any doubt.
And besides, will anyone really stand for this? The idea of recordable media -- vcrs, in particular -- is very deeply ingrained, and most people probably consider it their "right" to record their television. And rightly so!
It's incredible to me that so many presumably intelligent people waste so much effort on these draconian measures. Corporate greed is to blame, of course - but, with a little thought, it seems to me that many of these people could do better by *not* alienating the populace, and by finding some other, better way of making their money such that everyone could be happy. The MPAA and their kind are scared of technology that they don't really understand, and they're losing their grip on the industry. Tough luck. Legislation shouldn't be put in place which will serve big business at the expense of the consumer. Rather, big business needs to learn to evolve to the consumer's wishes, or it needs to die.
Right, so then you think it's ok to set up a dictatorship? No need for any of that pesky 'democratic debate' nonsense? Just get it done with no accountability whatsoever?
Wrong.
The ends do not justify the means. Ever.
Hokey statistics and ancient misconceptions are no match for a good thought in your head, kid!
DRM? No thanks, I'll just get it somewhere else...
How, exactly, is a PVR any different from a VCR?
Ok, lets say we give in to the removal of the ad-skipping feature. Now -- how is it different?
Whenever someone comes out with new technology to prevent piracy, all it does is spur interest in trying to get by it. For instance, the "protected CDs" that could be gotten around with a marker. If they are serious about it, they need to implement the technology without letting the world know first, that way there will at least be a slow down before people realize it and get around it. It's always just a matter of time.
My other sig is an import.
"Now let's hope some of the Good Guys (tm) start doing the same thing."
You're laboring under the misconception that there are "good guys". Remember, this is Congress we're talking about.
(Yeah yeah, I know, Boucher seems fairly clueful on issues of importance to the Slashcrowd, but I suspect he's just playing contrarian because the RIAA/MPAA haven't stuffed him full o' cash. Yet. Dig around, I'm sure he belongs to somebody other than his voters.)
Learn from the mistakes of others. You won't live long enough to make them all yourself.
"There has grown in the minds of certain groups in this country the idea that just because a man or corporation has made a profit out of the public for a number of years, the government and the courts are charged with guaranteeing such profit in the future, even in the face of changing circumstances and contrary to public interest. This strange doctrine is supported by neither statue or common law. Neither corporations or individuals have the right to come into court and ask that the clock of history be stopped, or turned back."
-Robert Heinlein, Life Line, 1939
nuclear iraq bioweapon encryption cocaine korea terrorist
Our legislative system is bogged down with bureaucracy and partisan game-playing. The only decisions that get made with any efficiency are those dealing with terrorists or legislators' pay raises. So although I find their goals nauseating, the senators' approach of going straight to the source and sidestepping the whole legislative tar pit is admirable and invigorating.
I wonder if this isn't a bad precedent. The members of the legislature are accountable to the electorate (in theory at least.) If the proposed regulation becomes a law, the voters can hold the senator from Disney accountable for his actions. Referring the matter to the FCC will no doubt be a faster means to the same end, but it is an end-run around the democratic process.
After all, how many people voted for any of the members of the FCC?
If anything, this move strikes me as rather anti-democratic. Certainly, bypassing the individuals who are publicly accountable from the process entirely would speed things up. I am sure that the lobbiests and appointees could get rules and regulations passed much faster. I am not sure that it would be to Joe Sixpack's advantage though...
However, I am sure that the MPAA and RIAA would find the results very satisfactory. Just think how much they could save if they did not have to buy politicians anymore!
*** Where are we going? And what's with this handbasket?
It would be just like saying "DVD's will not be copied" 5 years ago. We all know that isn't true.
Someone will always find a way around it, just as the MPAA will always find a way to stop it. This article shows that it is seemingly more difficult for the MPAA to put these procedures in place, that it is for people to circumvent them.
This is a Good Thing--it shows the government is protecting fair-use for the most part. Just as people will not stop circumventing stupid technologies that restric fair use (e.g. DeCSS), the MPAA will never stop their crusade either.
They have a flawed business model, and think we are all thieves, and while they continue to have enough money to buy senators (Fritz et al.), that image will prevail, and the leapfrogging will continue.
"The problem is that the minority of people who actually vote are uninformed and ignorant to the issues that really matter."
Actually, the problem is that to those who vote, these types of issues DON'T matter. I'd be willing to bet they have a laundry list of concerns before they get to stuff that the slashcrowd cares about.
The FCC is an executive agency. It should not be making policy, especially policy of this scope. Haven't you been paying attention to the disastrous results of FCC policy changes in the 1990s? Consolidation of radio into one or two companies. Creation of horizontal media empires. Extensive and undisclosed cross-branding. Death of HDTV.
This is not two elected officials taking the high road out of the muck and mire. This is two elected officials who know that there is no way they can get something like this through Congress -- most voters like their VCRs very much, thank you -- and thus these two elected officials want to do an end-run around the democratic process.
In an administration explicitly modeled on and sympathetic to big business, of course the bought senators would rather deal with the bureaucrats. The bureaucrats are much more likely to have at heart the interests of the senators' masters, Big Media.
The Mongrel Dogs Who Teach
That "tar pit" you speak of is also known as the democratic process and it exists for VERY good reasons. It exists so that people who might possibly disagree have a chance to express their disagreement. Legislation by executive fiat is a very dangerous road to travel.
Historically democracies are destroyed, not by external forces, but rather buy a growing internal dislike of the corrpution and tar pit characteristics of the process. People feel like democracy doesn't ever get anything done, and while it is true to some extent, it is also democracy's methodical checks and balances that protects us from fascism. Fascism gets things done, it just sucks to be you when the boot heel comes down on you and those you love.
This sort of move seems indicative of what I fear may be dangerous times for our democracy. All sides of the political spectrum are convinced that the system is fundamentally broken. Government, unable to trust it's own ability to get things done has been setting up these little extra-democractic bureaucracies to run the show without public input, in the hopes of getting something accomplished. ICANN is a perfect example of this dangerous trend, a bureaucracy outside of democratic controls, created by a government convinced of its own ineptness to manage things correctly.
Maybe the distance between manipulating the FCC to get copy controls into broadcasts and electing Hitler is wide, but it seems that the same motivations drive either. We're fed up with the system, and we want somebody to fix it and increasingly we seem willing to give up our democracy just to get something done. It's that kind of desperation that destroys democracy.
This sig has been temporarily disconnected or is no longer in service
You are so immature. This is an important topic which affects each and every one of us. I'd like to see you sing "Who Let The Dogs Out" when your VCR won't let you record the video on MTV anymore.
Sell your TV.
Try, just try, life without a television. You'd be amazed how little you miss it, and how much other stuff you'll do instead. If you have a significant other, you'll have time to actually spend with that person, instead of sitting on your arse and not looking at each other. If you don't have an SO, you'll drastically increase your chances of finding one. If you're not looking, you'll at least have time to pursue other hobbies, like coding, or cooking, or bungee jumping, or whatever the heck else trips your trigger. Just try it. You may very well love it.
We live in a capitalist society. If you don't like what the businesses are trying to do to you, then stop using their product. What the hell does a federally-mandted broadcast flag matter to you when you don't watch TV?
Obliteracy: Words with explosions
Why isn't the current laws enforce instead of introducing new ones? I just don't get it.
You posted this AC and I'll never know why. At first glance it looks like a troll, but it's not.
The NRA has advanced this argument for years. It's summed up in their bumper stickers "Guns don't kill people, people kill people." As much as I hate to say it, they're right.
DVRs don't commit piracy, people commit piracy.
The NRA has launched a succefull and powerfull campaign in American government to portray guns as tools, not weapons. The MPAA and the RIAA are launching a similarly successfull campaign to portray P2P networks, DVRs, CD burners, DVD burners, Computers, Abaci, and Pencils as criminal skills development equipment.
I only wish the technical professionals in the US had the gumption to organize like the AARP has. There's a reason why everyone's afraid to touch Social Security but no one thinks twice before trying to outlaw something like floppy drives.
Killfile(TGK)
No trees were killed in the creation of this post. However, many electrons were inconvenienced.
(From my blog)
I question the appropriateness and perhaps even legality (in an abstract theoretical sense) of a member of the legislative branch of the government urging a part of the executive branch to grab power it does not seem to have, because the legislative branch has not granted it. The legislator does not work by fiat, it's his job to legislate. Should he fail in that endeavor, as Hollings has up to this point, he should not go behind the scenes and try to get the executive branch to do his bidding anyhow.
Congress should officially reprimand Hollings for this. (Not that I expect it...)
Watch a movie at your local cinema. Oh no, sorry, we hate the MPAA, don't we.
Watch DVDs. Erk, same problem.
Listen to music. Nope, that's the RIAA. Not doing very well, are we?
Use P2P software constantly. Isn't that supposed to be terrorism?
Write open-source software. Sigh. No, because open-source is terrorism too.
Send e-mails and read the internet. Unless you want to be monitored constantly.
Play games on your PC. Unless we don't like the EULA. Or it's by Blizzard.
Read a book. Do we hate publishers at the moment? No? Whee! We've found a means of entertainment!
Boredom - the fate awaiting all who believe in freedom ^_^
Maran
I'm working my way through "A People's History of the United States" and find the current tactics of the RIAA and the MPAA very similar to those described throughout the book. The use of ostensibly neutral "laws" to further enhance the pocket books of monied interests.
.
Prior to 1910 the law was used to protect the land owners and property owners, with numerous examples throughout the book of the courts upholding what were essentinally very unconstitutional laws favouring monied interests over blacks and poor whites (i.e. those without property)
With the RIAA and the MPAA we are seing similar sorts of laws proposed, only this time to protect the monied interests (those that "own" intellectual property) against those who don't.
Why do the monied interests have the power to pass and uphold these laws? Because they control the legal systems - they are better able to afford lawyers, better able to lobby congress, better able to propogandize against those that hold alternate views.
To me, this is all part of the tragedy of America these days.
"Which is why people need to inform them of issues that should matter to them."
Why should this matter to them? Seriously. Have you ever tried to talk to average people about this stuff? I come from a fairly typical blue-collar community. I've tried explaining these types of things, using some of the most easy to comprehend methods around. The great majority still either do not get it or could care less. They just want tax breaks, decent schools and other public services, and health care. Recording TV shows is going to be about last on their list.
"Why do candidates always talk about a few key issues when they're up for office?"
Because thats what matters to voters, no matter how it starts, opinion poll research will still say campaign finance, abortion, etc. That's what matters to everyday Americans. And I can just imagine the first average person raising a ruckus about recording TV shows. His neighbors would quickly label him an idiot, since there are so many other, more compelling things to be concerned with, like better schools and health care.
This is _not_ a sexy issue. It will not be a big attention grabber. The average voter is not going to be the one fighting this, it will be the companies who stand to lose if it happens. VCR makers, TIVO, etc. Joe Sixpack just wants the potholes on his street fixed, a safe school for little Jimmy, and health care thats good enough so he can afford it if he takes ill. Frankly I can't blame him.
What matters to you and I is generally no one elses concern.
Correct. For instance, it would be totally immoral for a person to committ suicide (an act expressly forbidden in the Bible and illegal in most states) to prevent a terrorist act from killing thousands. We'll just have to live with the worse outcome.
This is not suicide, it is heroic sacrifice of ones life to save others, there is a difference.
It would also be wrong to go back and in time to 1937 and shoot Hitler, before he gassed millions of innocent people because savings uncountable lives of children just isn't justified by taking away fewer than 10 lives of a raving lunatic.
Time travel "What If" type scenarios are silly. You have two problems, first, at that time in his life, he had not commited any of those crimes and you would be in effect killing an innocent man. Second, there is no way to insure by removing him things wouldn't be worse, another, dictator could rise up, put Germany on the H-Bomb fast track and use it first against Russia, winning the war. Perhaps because some economic plan was never implemented, Germany and possibly Europe could have remained in a depression for much longer, causing millions to die of starvation and or disease. Or WWII may happened anyway, changing virtually nothing.
There are millions of possibilties and not one of them means anything.
"Our products just aren't engineered for security,"
-Brian Valentine,VP in charge of MS Windows Development
Yes, it would've been more democratic to debate it and vote in the congress on something of this nature, but we have two choices:
1) Sit around crying and watch it happen.
or
2) Accept the opportunity to defend the consumer and take advantage of the comment period!
I don't know about you, but option two sounds better than grabbing the kleenex and crying to till I puke, thanks.
You can bet that TiVo and ReplayTV will write comments, but the general public has to care or this will be a cakewalk for the bad guys. If you're wealthy, consider hiring a DC communications lawyer to write your stuff for you. They're expensive, but you're rich, what do you care. Or of course, donate to EFF.
Don't forget that the FCC is mandated to regulate broadcasting "in the public interest." You're the public, tell them what your interest is.
Once the FCC issues a Notice of Proposed Rule Making (NPRM) you should be able to submit comments online at fcc.gov. Or you could always print a hard copy, sign it in ink, and send certified mail to the address on the site. (Which would be much better.)
Who did what now?
What the tech community needs is a united front on the issues. Sure, there's the EFF, DigitalConsumer.org, anti-dmca.org, digitalspeech.org, publicknowledge.org, etc. etc. etc - all with varying degrees of influence, completeness, and scope. It really seems like a big duplication of effort.
Whether you like them or not, we could learn a lot from the National Rifle Association. The NRA has their "protecting our freedoms" issues, and they've managed to unite a group of fairly individualist people for a common goal. Legislators do not defy the NRA lightly in Congress, while they routinely screw over the tech industry. We need a solid lobby like the NRA to watch over our interests in Washington.
ShavenYak writes:
m ai n/0,14179,2874687,00.html
;)
> Not only is he failing his constituents, he's
> endangering the freedoms of the entire country.
The entire Senate is not qualified to make any laws forbidding fair use, as the following illustrates:
http://techupdate.zdnet.com/techupdate/stories/
>>> Until last week, the staff of the United
>>> States Senate was demonstrating that the
>>> people who create our legislation don't think
>>> they have to obey it themselves. The Senate,
>>> which is now crafting legislation that would
>>> further restrict the illegal sharing of
>>> copyrighted works over networks, was
>>> apparently a hotbed of illegal file sharing
>>> and other peer-to-peer (P2P) networking
>>> activity.
Hm, does the word "hypocrite" ring a bell?
> I guess he's too senile to remember the oath he
> took to uphold the Constitution?
I don't know if Hollings took part personally in the mass unconstitutional screaming fest, but a couple weeks ago a good sized chunk of Congress ran outside, said the pledge of allegiance to the flag, screaming the then unconstitutional "under God" part. Regardless of the merits of the judge's controversial decision, I would think doing something that was legally at that moment found to be unconstitional would break their oaths.
Even if their oaths are intact, no one can argue their immaturity.
Come on, Tok Wira, these sharks have gotta pay!
New Kirk calling Mothra, we need you today!
If they don't want me to record and watch their shows and advertising, I will be happy to just go read a book - or a lot of them and give up on TV completely. I still have DVD movies to watch. So I guess I can eventually cancel my very expensive digital cable subscription and get back into reading - something everyone should do more of - and I mean the paper kind of book, not e-books.
-- Knuckle Blood : Official Lube of Team Rusty Nuts.
There is a point to be learned here: passive observation is useless in regards to shit like this. You have to take ACTION! You have to risk sounding like a religious zealot and "preach" to people about what's going on. Why the DMCA is bad. How the MPAA is screwing over music as they know it (as if it's not bad enough already). And so on. Not buying a CD may make a very slight impact on the MPAA, but take the time to explain to people why you're doing so. That way, hopefully, you can instill the idea and reasoning in someone else's head too. Numbers matter here, whether it's how much $$$ you have to spend to lobby in congress, or how many friends you can get to let the FCC know that this idea is rediculous.
Make your voice be heard.
I unplugged my t.v...did you?
"Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned for SEGA. ..."
It just feels wrong that these people getting payed over and over. Record a song, get some payment, and thats it. Why should they keep getting payed over and over when the song is being played again? Does the people who built my TV keep getting money when i used it? Or any other thing?
Sick I tell you, lets vote to get the damn laws changed.
If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating