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.
So the FCC won't let me be or let me be me, so let me see........
the MPAA will start distributing movies with only two minutes of actual story line and filling the remaining 88 minutes with explosions, noise, bad dialogue, and product placements to prevent the unauthorized distribution of its intellectual property.
As if there wasn't a fairly good chance that HDTV adoption was doomed before.
Of course the MPAA could just make all TVs without builtin digital decoders illegal but even their (very strong) lobbying ability is powerful enough for that. Yet.
Won't someone find a way to filter the watermark out. If so, how will they have control. (are PVRs going to have little stickers on them saying they where 'measured' by the dept of digital watermarks... (think gas pumps))...
--
Just a thought, not a flame.
Accentuate the positive, don't waste your mod points on the negative.
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...
Apparently too impatient to implement the Broadcast Flag in digital media through legislative means
I'm glad companies no longer feel the need to respect the government, and they'd rather just pressure them into doing what they want fast. I find it amazing what people will do (government) when they don't understand things (technology), they just assume people like the FCC are right.
Did you even look at the story? Their paid senators are going to the FCC for them! Yeesh!
jello.
aka aron.
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.
Hollings is lucky he's not from a technologically oriented state. No matter, he'll be gone in 2004. He's done enough other things to offend the voters of SC in the past four years. (Or else he'll retire)
I mean why can't they backdoor established procedures with something constructive? Like putting a chokehold on the MPAA/RIAA? Or, god forbid, actually representing the wishes and views of the people who put them in the position they're in.
"I'm a leaf on the wind. Watch how I soar."
-Hoban Washburn
At what point in time will the government and big business understand that watermarks and "broadcast flags" will not work? I can't imagine the ammount of money spent on technology that will (and has) failed in persuit of curtailing piracy...
When will they figure out that P2P file sharing networks (not to mention IRC, which apparently they are oblivious to) won't be going away? They need to play the cards life has dealt them and figure out how to use these to their advantage or provide a system that is better and more aligned with their business (selling commercials). The world is about change, did all the radio stations get angry when they invented TV? No, they all became TV stations too!
For example, if you assume all TV brodcasts are going to be pirated. Make it easier for the people downloading these shows by providing them for free on a website and keeping the commercials in the show. If you stream them then they cannot fast forward through commercials. So you basically provide all of your content on demand with commercials (more air time for advertisers thus more expensive commercials). Personally, I'd go watch Alias streamed (if it was a good 300k stream) with commercials rather than sifting around and waiting in queues on IRC or spending days trying to get it on gnutalla. And if we are worried about modem users, they can't download pirated TV anyway, files are too large.
Just a thought.
In what twisted bassackward world does *any* of the uses for a broadcast flag serve the public interest?
XenoWolf The Original - Since 1993
Our legislative system is bogged down with bureaucracy and partisan game-playing
I'll agree that the legislative system does bog things down, but....the FCC is bureaucracy. At least when it comes through the legislature, the decision comes from elected representatives, not from appointed bureaucrats like Michael Powell.
Call me nutty, but I've always been a fan of the "representation" thing.
"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.
Now that Real is open-source, wanna bet that the MPAA will "embrace and extend" it with it's own anti-piracy scheme???
thats it, Im through, there is nothing worth watching anyway, so good-bye boob-tube, we had some good times in the past, twilight zone, Barney Miller, MASH, I love Lucy, Hogans Heros, Bugs Bunny and Road Runner, but today it is nothing but drivel like "When batchlorettes in Alaska go bad 3" Its not worth it anymore, and this just seals the deal.
Thanks to file sharing, I purchase more CDs
Thanks to the RIAA, I buy them used...
If they'll enforce broadcast flag under FCC rules, then it will create a good opportunity to ads-free recording: you just have to reverse firmware in your recorder to store programs WITH broadcast flag...So all ads will be skipped :)
hehe
As long as the video signal is transmitted from the TV to my eyes in unencrypted form, I can record it with a video camera. What's the big deal here? heh.
example.org - powered by Linux!
Yes, the rest of the world is setting a fine free speech example as evidenced by Italy
"I don't think it's selfish, to eat defenseless shellfish." -NOFX
They just know they introduced their bills way too late and don't want to wait.
I see you've seen an advance screening of {Insert bad summer movie here} too, eh?
This is my sig. Its pathetic.
"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
..Engineering..
I'm not actually aware of any 'protection' system, on CD, Video or DVD that is un-hackable.
Why do they continue to bang their heads against the wall? Surely by now they should have realized that paying some mathametics guru to sit in a room for 12 months to devise some wonderful algorithm is _not_ the answer. Narrow minded ideas, it's getting them nowhere and it's sure as hell costing them (and us) a lot of money.
"Never let the truth get in the way of a good story..."
Otherwise they need to stay the hell out of my equipment, because it belongs to me.
-- We live in a world where lemonade is artificial and soap has real lemon.
Actually it's their paid senators/congresscritters going to the FCC since the MPAA hasn't pain enough legislators to get this through the legal process.
--- I wish I could hear the soundtrack to my life. That way I'd know when to duck.
They have realized that wide enforcement of the current laws is difficult to impossible (mainly due to the populous being both ill informed and disliking said laws). Instead of seeing this as a problem with the laws, and thus their business plans they are simply going to make it impossible to actually break the laws.
Neatly enough, this will also make it very, very difficult for you to become a content producer without their blessing. If you can save your own audio/video in a format you can copy you could do the same with theirs. Can't have that.
jello.
aka aron.
There have been a number of posts suggesting that no matter what the MPAA does in the form of a broadcast flag some clever cracker will break it. While this is almost certainly true the MPAA will still achieve two objectives;
1. No matter what you say, I don't believe that your casual home user is going to break out a soldering iron (or metaphorical soldering iron in the case of a software hack) to defeat this protection. So the MPAA will eliminate a lot of copying.
2. Since this flag would be a form of copyright protection it would, as I understand it, fall under the DMCA. Ask Dimitri about how much fun it is to present valid security flaws in a copyright protection scheme.
So while a, fairly small I believe, group of techies will defeat this encryption, the club of the DMCA would probably greatly cut down on the sale of a box (ala the old school "free" pay per view boxes) to do it for your casual user.
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?
47 USC 336(b)(4), Hollings justification for the broadcast flag: ... adopt such technical and other requirements as may be necessary or appropriate to assure the quality of the signal used to provide advanced television services, and may adopt regulations that stipulate the minimum number of hours per day that such signal must be transmitted....
The [FCC] shall
I don't think any judge would believe that this provides for mandating standards to avoid copyright infringement. A change of law would be necessary if Hollings does want such a mandate.
You can ask the same question about the drug war - why not change the laws, because if you arrested every person who'd ever committed a drug related crime, you'd arrest the population of Texas, Colerado, Arkansaws.
Really, the game of fighting drugs, or fighting piracy has become such a business and goal in its own right that it really isn't connected to the purpose (protecting communities, artists) it was meant to serve in the first place. What are all the businesses who's viability rests on the protection of IP going to do if you just go out and arrest all the guilty folks tommorow?
"Old man yells at systemd"
They'd both complain about the other getting paid more, and refuse to help until they had a sole "contract". Weehee, on the road to chaos!
Do it. Then I'll not only not record television, I'll stop watching it entirely. PVR changed my life. If you ask me to change back It's going to hurt YOU.
Lowmag.net
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
If the Carriage and Buggy industry had been able to get the senatorial ancestors of Fritz (the Shitz) Hollings in their back pockets in the 19th century, there'd be as much horseshit on our roads today as there is bullshit in the Halls of Congress. What's amazing is just how brazenly unprincipled these sell-outs are, and even more amazing is how they manage to get elected and, worse, re-elected. The frightening thing about all of this is that the whores are going to get their way, the industry fat-asses will get their laws, and the rest of us poor saps will either have to shut the hell up or be vilified as pro-terrorist crypto-traitors. I'd head to the hills -- but the fat cats and politicians have probably already bought and branded them.
This ruling was passed after MPAA realized that there is a signal flow between eye and brain and storing that DATA in memory is a copyright violation.
Sounds funny eh? It isnt. It stopped being funny long time ago.We consumers are theives, and pirates who want to destroy the economy.
Thats what the fine print says. PeriodMy Aurora : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o91ZsGwJYyg
FB : https://www.facebook.com/TanveersPhotography
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.
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. 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.
ONLY betaCAM vcr's are immune to macrovision because of the built in TBC. Macrovision is based on screwing up the video signal so that the VCR will freak out when recording because of the AGC circuitry. if you had a vcr that was anything but the crap-grade sold to comsumers (Yes your $1000.00 Sony VCR is CRAP GRADE) it wouldn't have an AGC but have a manual video level control and therefore it would self defeat Macrovision..
Macrovision can be easily defeated in every VCR by simply finding the AGC circuit and either potting down it's Variable resistance for reaction or replace it's chip resistor with something significantly smaller... or as I have done.... simply disable it by bypassing it with a simple jumper. (Video in jumpered to video out, remove the AGC circuitry or cut the traces going to it.)
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
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.
It's too true. Had one of the Good Guys taken a similar action, it would have been hailed in these pages as a necessary escalation to prevent the whole issue from getting bogged down in a corrupt legislative process. But when the Bad Guys do it, we all label it an underhanded attempt to circumvent the checks and balances of that very same legislature.
And you want to know the scariest part? Even though I'm quite aware of this double standard, I still feel the temptation to lock Hollings in the Senate coat closet and not let him out until he admits he's a "dirty rat fink and kept boy of the entertainment industry".
Sometimes a overly strong opinion can be almost as dangerous thing to hold as a overly weak one...
It would be very difficult to not let the world know first.
1: You have to tell people that the system isn't standards complient or that a new version of the standard has comeout.
2: Competition rules would require that information be freely available to manufacturers(but possibly cost something to implement)
3: Somebody's going to leak the information anyhows.
thank God the internet isn't a human right.
That's handy to know. Can you still get blank tapes? (this is not a flame, it's a legit quesion)
Hey kids, there's only 5 days left 'til Yak Shaving Day!
This is actually going to HURT them. If I can't record the show, then I'm not going to be able to watch it if I'm not around when its on. That means I'm less likely to get hooked on the show and less likely to buy it on DVD later, or buy any of the other collectible junk sold to support the show.
If anything, I will boycott any show which won't let you record it out of spite and I think a lot more people may as well.
--Won't that be grand? Computers and the programs will start thinking and the people will stop. - Dr. Walter Gibbs
I wonder if we're ever going to get to the point where they figure out that *they need us* more than *we need them!* Really, there are plenty of things to do that are more interesting than sitting around and watching TV and/or movies.
Who knows? This could lead to a new baby boom! Or a less fat-dense population!
"Sometimes the truth is stupid." - Lawrence, creator of Prime Intellect
The true irony is how you like the very method that might be the _only_ way Hollywood gets to truely fuck you.
.. if you don't believe its working, thats pretty much the reason it ain't.
Bureaucracy might be slow, but thats the whole point - so those with power and no public accountability can't stick it up your ass with nary a second thought.
Democracy
"Old man yells at systemd"
(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...)
Instead of posting here, find out who your reps are and write them complaining!
"We're here to defend intellectual property," said Jim DeLong, an economist at CEI. "If you want balance, go to another session."
Does it appear to anyone else that that is pretty much the running theme for ANYTHING the MPAA has its fingers in? Its all or nothing with them. They rail about how they are losing like crazy, yet refuse to hear anything even remotely like a compromise.
Well, I paid a heck of a lot of money for my home theater setup.. I guess if they manage to whack my TiVO (which I would assume they are also thinking about, as its pretty easy to dump the signal out to a decent recorder) then DirectTV is gonna lose my business. And probably a lot of OTHER peoples business as well.
This looks to me like a pre-emptive strike at the HDTV standards that are going to come out.. after all, why WOULDNT you want to record something that is twice the clarity and fidelity of even the best DVD right now? They can control DVD's to a certain extent, but they will NOT be able to control this, they know it, and they are running scared before the fact.
(Now.. if only we could get them to program something WORTH RECORDING in HDTV.. right now, I only get HBO (same old same old) and a couple of news channels.. and interminable re-runs of ER)
Maeryk
Feminine Protection? What is that? A chartreuse flame thrower?
I like my TV, for one reason: it lets me watch movies I rent and own. I don't like broadcast television, because it's saturated with commercials and the selection just isn't there and the quality is spotty and I have to stick to someone else's schedule (I can't afford a TiVo). Plus my wife and daughter like their soaps.
So I keep the TV, got a good pickup antenna for network broadcasts, and refuse to pay for cable. Yeah, there are shows on Sci-Fi and Cartoon Network I wish I could catch, but when it's a big deal I ask a friend or family member to tape 'em for me. And they generally do. And if they don't, I wait until I can buy or rent the DVD and watch the whole thing without commercials (or download them off of KaZaA while I'm waiting, if it's really that important me).
Bottom line: I'd rather spend $40/month on two DVDs I really like and want to own, than on cable television piping hours upon hours of useless junk into my household.
Well beta's get out into the wild..
M$ may monkey farm there developers so that developers only have access to a small amount of code, this is probably why the code is so bloated I can't intergrate systems properly in a sand-box environment
thank God the internet isn't a human right.
You approve? They're going straight to the FCC to bypass the standard legislative process, which might actually get people to think about what it is, exactly, that the MPAA really wants. They're pulling an end-run to get it into practice, so the law is easier to pass. That's not applaudable: that defeats the entire point.
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.
When are we going to get those two voted out of office? They are now good for the US and all they do is pass bills that are good for the MPAA.
Mike
I didn't use the preview button, so get over it!!!!
Mike
> strange doctrine is supported by neither statue or common law.
Heinlein was obviously not familiar with the concept of Lobbyists...
I am not a number! I am a man! And don't you
Damn.
All Troll + "offtopic" mods are meta moderated as "Unfair", because you abused the system.
because people have the right to timeshift all of the tv they watch, not just the programming the broadcasters want. There is already caselaw substantiating this.
The MPAA tried shenanigans like this in '00 attacking RecordTV.com suceededing in shutting it down.
If PVRs were in every house instead of VCRs, there would be no chance of this getting by, but since this wont directly impact people for several years it will be too late to complain once the new generation of flag obeying goods arrives, and everyone will probably just accept that now, you have to PAY to record TV and watch it at a later date. Or this will kill the adoption of PVRs; once people realize that you cant record whatever you want with a flag-crippled PVR.
ATH0 Bitcoin: 1DnwFLXczVZV8kLJbMYoheUrpqHesjxrSi
Next the MPAA will be after those that have this device that circumvents ad's its called a TV remote, and TV viewers everywhere are using it to skip commercials by changing the channel. The MPAA has decided to fight back by running commercials on every channel at the same time so that channel surfing can no longer circumvent TV AD's. "We even went so far as to add this huge chain to the TV so that users are no longer allowed to leave the TV to skip adds. If they try to leave or disconnect the chain, the TV automatically turns off for 10 minutes. Some think this is drastic but we must protect the rights of the movie industry.", said Jack Valenti.
People like Hollings for non-re-election? Perhaps we need "The Geek Lobby Page" where information about key publicly elected officials is kept.
When is Hollings up for re-election?
Who is running against him?
Are the opponents views any better?
We all grumble, complain, and flame. We also say we're too small. But have we tried yet to use tried-and-true mainstream political techniques?
The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
If the Slashdot community was serious about taking action then this is a very good way to go. Someone should setup a Slashdot like site. Provide the community with the relevant facts as to what shows are flagged, what products were advertised and who is the company (with contact info) that needs to here our displeasure. We have the technology to allow us to effectively organize, we have the passion need to fight, and we have the financial influence to get the attention of the advertisers. We just need to ACT! Or we can sit around bitching about it until it is to late.
Better yet, skip the Congress, FCC, and go straight to the National Guard. Convince them to enforce a distribution of government-issue televisions that only show the "America Channel." Don't let anyone record it, incase something erroneous is shown. Dictate that every citizen watch it for at least 6 hours a day. Children under 12 must watch for 8 hours a day. I love you, Big Brother.
Sure today , if its human readable its machine recordable, but what happens when DRM is mandated to be included in EVERYTHING.. wont happen today, but in time.. and at that point that statement wont apply anymore to the masses... just the few that can disable the DRM components..
---- Booth was a patriot ----
What capitalists? There are no capitalists to be found in this story. This situation is an example of socialism, not capitalism. If you are a socialist, this story should make you happy.
Just because the welfare cheats in this story are businessmen, does not mean it is capitalism at work. The fact that there are welfare cheats in the story at all means it is socialism at work, regardless of who the welfare cheats are.
Do not confuse pro-business with pro-market.
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?
"Guns don't kill people, people kill people." As much as I hate to say it, they're right. No they are not - "Guns don't kill people, bullets do - guns just make them go really fast!" But seriously - ""Did you really think we want those laws observed?" said Dr. Ferris. "We want them to be broken. You'd better get it straight that it's not a bunch of boy scouts you're up against... We're after power and we mean it... There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What's there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced or objectively interpreted - and you create a nation of law-breakers - and then you cash in on guilt. Now that's the system, Mr. Reardon, that's the game, and once you understand it, you'll be much easier to deal with." ('Ayn Rand - Atlas Shrugged' 1957) "
"I say we take off, nuke the site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure."
Sorry, I like sitting down and just get fed some story at times. Just have a beer and don't really work my brain much, at least not more than getting into the series/movie, particularly some sci-fi or cartoon stuff (Farscape, ST: Voyager, Futurama, Simpsons lately). There's too much and too little. Having no TV is too little. If you can do without, fine. I've been without one for 5 months, and it's been more than enough. Books and music and "Real Life(tm)" is fun enough, but judicious use of TV is a good thing, not a bad one.
Kjella
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
As the quote on the bottom of the page says (currently)
Woolsey-Swanson Rule: People would rather live with a problem they cannot solve rather than accept a solution they cannot understand.
I think that Fritz persuaded himself into believing that "quality of the signal" was equivalent to "quality of the content encoded onto the signal". And of course even that delusion depends on the "no content without protection" mindset to make it "necessary or appropriate".
Hopefully the FCC will be able to recognize the mistaken interpretation and file both letters in the appropriate (round) recepticle.
"From my cold, dead hands you damn, dirty apes!" - CH
It's easy to find out who is supporting your favorite congressman.
You can look it up here.
I agree with you 100%, and have long felt that the NRA is the right example. More appropriate than many might thing, even. After all, crypto is a big geek issue, so we are very much into, "The right to bear arms." But getting too close to the NRA might make for strange bedfellows. (except for ESR, of course)
The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
grep -ri 'should work'
Pie-ing government and business leaders has been a popular form of semi-non-violent (though it's technically assault) protest for a while, it's recently been done to Bill Gates as well as Prime Minister Jean Chretien of Canada (among others). However, in the current climate it's likely to get you shot. After all that pie could be a terrorist weapon of some sort!
Freedom: "I won't!"
Right now, the little freedoms are being taken away, like TV recordings. They are not as important as other major issues and fall by the wayside easily.
One can imagine a world where you're jailed because you share the same national heritage with some evil person (heck, what if your surname just happens to be the same as a certain anti-American?). What if you're slaughtered because of your religion? Or because of your beliefs about personal consumption of certain substances? Or because you know how to use a computer too well?
Some of these attrocities have taken place in the past, some in the present, and some might very well take place in the future. There's an unnerving trend here: so-called "law" degenerates to the point of arresting and killing people because of what they "might" do, presumably because of something they have in common with the perpetrator of some crime.
If history is any guide, things will get worse before they get better.
Ironically, the 9/11/2001 attacks against the U.S. suggest just how vulnerable the nation, and by extention, it's government is. They suggest that when the time for revolution comes, a wide-spread decentralized attack on key areas would have a good chance of success. No doubt, while the government seeks to control panic, it will be caught off-guard as the attacks continue: what will they do? Launch nukes against widespread targets on their own soil?
OBL's strategic "mistake", was blowing his wad on one attack -- he was done for the night, as it were. What is most troubling, though, is that an act of war ("terrorism" is a weasel word applied to enemies not associated with a recognized nation) against the civilians of a democracy is perfectly logical: they freely elect their government with a process they all accept, so why not hold them responsible for it's actions? If you want to wage war on the government, wage war on those who put it in place.
Yes, yes, what about children and other non-voters? Surely they aren't responsible? No, but there's this notion of "collateral damage" in war - unintended, but expected, none the less. It's one of the things that makes war hell -- easily forgotten in these times of sanitized, automated engagement. Funny, thing, though, the winner's "collateral damage" is the loser's "war crime".
It is clear, then, that a revolution against a formidable enemy will likely involve initiation by a relatively small percentage of the population, taking a no-holds barred attitude toward "winning" (or, from their point of view, survival): you're either with us, or agin' us. We see this in acts of domestic "terrorism": people considered sociopaths harm civilians in an attack purportedly directed against government. I ask the following questions: (1) If such an attack were disproportionately effective in harming the ability of the government to infringe upon a right you believe in, and (2) supporting further such attacks would be easy, would you "go along", collateral damage be damned?
History says "yes". And that is what the Second American Revolution is going to look like -- unlike crumbling Eastern European regimes that toppled over from the sheer will of the opressed, the U.S. government is neither weak or crumbling. Taking it down would involve some of the dirtiest and blodiest fighting in history. And home grown -- unlike WW I and WW II, it's unlikely that foreign intervention would be significant.
That's a horrible scenario, isn't it? Sure, but it appears that violent revolution is the natural end result of any oppressive regime that's been handed too much power over the years. The government with the lesser mandate (and thus less centralized power) is the better government. Somehow, the potential price of a government strong enough to protect "us" from "them" doesn't seam worth it and is an illusion on it's face.
You could've hired me.
The absolute best solution to this kind of thing has been around for decades, works perfectly, doesn't cost a cent, and causes your day to suddenly seem a couple of hours longer:
Sell your books.
Try, just try, life without books. You'd be amazed how little you miss them, 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 federally-mandted illiteracy matter to you when you don't read books?
[PowerPoint] is a tool for capitalist presentation
Investors contact me!
Free Mac Mini Yeah, it's
That broadcast flag is a bit like a padlock on a dumpster to keep raccoons out.
a3c6 0e89 b1ec aa4d d630 26c8 d07e 7eed 8148 5503 02b4 dfaa 9922 b28d 0820 c4af
If the MPAA owns the copyright, then why don'tthey just tell the television stations that they can't air it without the bit set? Why push in FCC regulations when you can just require it anyway?
-no broken link
When will the insanity stop????
-- sed s/liberty/profit/g US.Constitution
And let's not get started on the other guy....
(Hey *I* voted against him!)Free Mac Mini Yeah, it's
What the effing difference does it make -- if it was broadcast for free viewing, what the holy heck difference does it make how many people see it or how they see it?!?
Infuriate left and right
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 only flaw in your argument being that DVR's have a legitimate use; but can be used for illegal purposes.
The gun is a tool designed solely to kill.
Corporation, n. An ingenious device for obtaining individual profit without individual responsibility. - Ambrose Bierce
Every time anything of this ilk comes up, I find myself thinking how good it is to live in the UK. I'm not going to extol the virtues of state broadcasting without commercials, because I think that has its own evils.
However, what the people over in the UK realise is that, in order to get people to watch TV, you have to make them want to watch it.
Locking people into watching shows live, rather than recording them, is going to reduce overall viewer figures, no two ways about it. The only way to make a system where people don't need a VCR is to allow them to watch the program whenever - i.e. make an individual stream available for each person each time they want to watch a programme. And that, my friends, ain't gonna happen, save for the odd few on-demand film channels.
I am still waiting for the day that the MPAA, RIAA, etc, realise that, no matter what they do, there will always be companies who are prepared to produce non-standards-compliant players to appease/please the marketplace. Just as you had region-free DVD players, so you'll get recorders that ignore the broadcast flag.
Of course, I'll be waiting a long time for the RIAA and MPAA to remove their heads from their behinds; however, in the meantime, it looks as if we can look forward to a world where legislation and licensing are so constrictive that starting up a new business anywhere remotely near the field of technology is going to be nigh on impossible.
Ah well - we can hardly say we didn't bring it upon ourselves.
Like car accidents, most hardware problems are due to driver error.
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.
I live in Dallas, ALL of the major radio stations are owned by Clear Channel, and when they have a "major" advertiser their commercial gets run on ALL their stations at once (or damn near close), so channel flipping doesn't help. All the stations run a similar format, at the same times, and some actually play similar music. Personally I think this approach has totally destroyed radio listening in the Dallas area. The same thing will eventually happen to television if we let the FCC make policy. My personal solution which I recommend is don't watch TV, vote with your dollar, if stuff is crap don't listen to it or watch it.
Television - in the US - is supported by advertising revenue and subscription fees. If enough viewers skip the commercials, I would expect one of two things to happen. One would be that subscription fees increase to cover the lost advertising revenue. The other would be increased use of product placement. Would either of these possibilities be more palatable for viewers? The irony is that there would be fewer "commercials" but the product placement might be more obvious that the commercials.
One thing I've wondered is how these viewers are accounted for in the rating systems that advertisers and broadcasters use to determine ad rates. Another thing I've wondered: is product placement more or less effective than commercials?
(I'm not the original author of this brilliant rant...)
I've been targeted right out of the market.
I've had it. I can't take any more advertising. Television, radio, magazines, billboards, even the Internet for Christ's sake. Everywhere. Why do they keep targeting me? I never did anything to them. I don't even buy anything! They're wasting their time! Fast food makes me feel like shit, soft drinks make me dizzy, candy is disgusting, chips make my stomach hurt, I don't smoke, and any band that has ever been advertised anywhere sucks unequivocally. I eat tortillas and vegetables, I drink tap water. I ride my $40 bike for entertainment. I buy a new pair of Dickies at the army navy store every year and I get all my other clothes at Costco in 3-packs. My car works fine, I use my Internet connection for long distance, I've had the same boots for three years and re-sole them when they wear out. As far as booze goes, well, as long as it's wet...
So why do they keep attacking me? Why are they filling every square inch of every available space in my life? Above urinals, on concert tickets, underneath the ice at hockey games, on blimps, in video games, as props in movies, plugs in rap songs, on shitty Web Sites (No, I will not visit your motherfucking sponsor. If you're not in it for the love, and you can't figure out any better way to pay for your site than by slapping some ugly, corrupted banner across the top of your pathetic work, then fucking close up shop, kill yourself, and leave the Web to non-polluters). They'd advertise on the backs of my eyelids if they could get away with it, and I can't hack it anymore. They win. I lose. They succeeded. I failed. Like Brian Wilson, I just wasn't built for these times. I fold. Here are all my cards. Keep the pot, keep my ante, keep the goddamn jacket on the back of my chair for all I care, I can get another at Costco. I'll be out in the parking lot getting drunk and yelling at cute girls because I can no longer stand the taste of tentacles. Marketing has poisoned everything worthwhile under the sun, so I'm giving it all up. Everything.
But the way I figure it, there's no real loss. I've seen all of the episodes of the Simpsons 200 times each. Most of the good writing was done 100 years ago. I haven't listened to FM radio in years. I could play all my records beginning to end alphabetically and I'd be 76 years old when I got to the Zeni Geva. Online culture is a fucking yawn, only good for buying stuffed goats on Ebay and getting cracked copies of $1000 software. Movies always end up at the 99 cent video store across the street eventually, and you can fast forward through those commercials. My girlie's cute and the corner bar has Pabst on tap. What else matters?
True, by shutting myself off to everything, I'm probably limiting my future potential as a 'community building' or 'bleeding edge' cog in someone's nightmarish vision of Internet profitability, but fuck, a simple read through my writing should've cured that anyway (Note to potential employers: The bidding starts at $120,000 a year with full dental).
So I'm out. No more.
I just feel bad for those of you I'm leaving behind. You'll be wearing your Slave Labor Nikes, sweating under a Third World Vest, listening to Everqueer or Fratboy Slim, your hair styled stupidly with gasoline and aborted pig placentas, trying to choke down a Double Meat Fuck Splattered Cow Testicles On The Slaughterhouse Floor Pus Coagulated Lactacious Secretion Yellow Dye #2 Deluxe. Man, will you be looking dumb. It makes me want to cry. You poor, oversugared demographic you. You're filling your apartments, your bodies, and your minds with useless junk. You stagger under your own weight, throwing money in random directions until you collapse and die, buried by a bunch of people who you failed to create meaningful human bonds with, who forget about you on the way home from the funeral.
Maybe I'm just oversensitive, but I actually feel those fingers reaching out at me - cute little girl fingers, feeling at my face like a bind man, pulling at the loose threads all over my brain, trying to find a sensitive one, one that tweaks me. Desires to be successful, attractive to the opposite sex, spiritually satiated, or conversely, the fears of disease, dismemberment, of being outcast, of repressed homosexual desires. Herd mentality as dictated by herd mentality. A gas mask of soiled wool, worn in a steaming shower of chlorinated pond water. A lumbering culture created by profit motive, existing as window dressing to disguise the brutal cynicism of the architects, the brassy checks and balances of accountants bleating commands to the flunky tastemakers on the production line. The subversion of anything subverting. The conversion of something dangerous into something profitable. The gutting of the lion and the championing of the taxidermist. And the puffy vests, my god, the puffy vests....
I give it one more shot.
I hit that little "on" button, and immediately this little red dot appears on my forehead. I feel the barrel rising on the other side of the glass as some powersuited executive attempts to get me in his sights. His scope is the best money can buy, but my nausea and skittishness mark me as difficult prey. I make a sprawling leap over a pile of books, spilling a glass of wine and sending my cats scattering. The TV takes a shot at me. It misses, but after the smoke clears, there's a shimmering can of Pepsi on the coffee table, seductively held by a well manicured (but severed) hand. Then the Taco Bell dog is outside, scratching at my window, singing "That's Amore", the secret code that alerts Col. Sanders and Ronald McDonald to get their tumor inducing grease guns at the ready. "We have a resistor! Alert Cap'n Crunch and Mrs. Butterworth. Tell Hogan to pull that Subaru around!" And then, as the entire posse of 1-800-COLLECT goons attempt to joke their way through the front door, a helmeted uberyouth does a backflip on rollerblades against the window, almost crushing the Taco dog, thankfully getting tangled in the iron jungle of security bars designed for such a moment. The severed Pepsi hand launches itself across the room onto the stereo, turns it to HOTROCK 99.5 FM and starts dancing suggestively on the turntable. Warm, gooey songs ooze from the speakers, blurring the lines between commercial and product, product and art. The walls are running with honey, blood, and Gatorade. Limp Bizkit tries to sign me up for the Rap Metal MasterCard, but is outvolumed by a chorus of creepy NY Gap models, dead eyed and Children of the Damned style, singing nostalgic 80s songs with cool detachment, trying to sell me vests. Close inspection reveals UPC codes on the backs of their beautiful necks and a legion of bulimic girls behind them, mascara mixing with puke on ten thousand toilet bowls. Budweiser frogs are crawling out of the toilet bowls. A one-eyed, mutilated Asian girl holds a pair of new Levi's against the window with a thin, purple arm and starts screeching "It's a Small World After All" at the top of her lungs. Magic, The Old Navy dog, is sniffing butts with the Taco Bell dog, who had since bit the Asian girl on the leg and now yelling something about Gordidas. A waifish beauty suddenly appears on my bed, vying for my attention, trying to talk me into a new car, her hand slowly unbuttoning her blouse, batting her doe-ishly brown eyes, "C'mon Mark. It's only a test drive. No one ever has to know."
Realizing my one escape, I yank my battered wallet out of my back pocket and pull out a twenty dollar bill. The entire scene freezes. All eyes are transfixed to the damp, smelly piece of paper. Andrew Jackson snickers and you can almost smell the cannibalized Indian on his breath. A miraculous cross breeze flows through my apartment, and I let the money go. It catches an upward draft, a hot air thermal, and is gone out the window.
And then, something even stranger happens. The spokespeople, animals, models, body parts, and corporate whores all disappear in a anti-climactic 'puff' of yellow smoke, leaving a slight smell of perfumed intestine twisting through the air. My twenty freezes in mid flight about thirty feet above the ground. A helicopter drops out of the sky, and lowers a rope down to the cash. A man in a business suit slides down the rope, commando style, and captures the money in his mouth, gives a contemptuous snort, mumbling something like "sucker" under his breath. And then the helicopter is gone, vanishing somewhere behind the radio towers spiking the top of Queen Anne Hill. Everything is quiet again.
I didn't just turn that TV off. I unplugged the motherfucker.
Speak truth to power.
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.
Well it will be once any "protection" is cracked, at least.
Ali
Ph33r m3!!!
Okay, did that work? I didn't think so. Commercials don't work either, at least not how we think.
The entire advertising industry is just a back door for the companies who offer $$ for ads to control content by, for instance, not advertising on shows they feel don't fit their image. If we can skip commercials, they don't lose this choke-hold on the networks, because they still pay the networks off to control what we see.
Advertising doesn't shape us by the ads, but by the content that the ads pay for anyway. So let them keep bribing the networks to make us all fat, lazy, dependent, racist, money-grubbing, sexist idiots, and we can skip the commercials like we have since the beginning of TV-time.
Gun's don't kill people - guns make it very very easy to kill people, so that people who otherwise wouldn't have killed do so. Often by accident.
DVR's don't commit piracy - neither do the people who use them. You have the right to record anything you are sent. PERIOD.
You claim there's some sort of similarity between the two situations. There isn't.
How do they define "hacking"? Deleting a user's files? Reformating the user's hard drive?
"Do I dare disturb the universe?"
...that my old silver top-loader is going to care about this just as much as it cares about macrovision: not at all.
Now that I think about it, my camcorder probably won't care either...
These Chicken Littles need to quit wasting their time. The VCR didn't kill them off, the digital equivalent isn't going to either, and for the same reason: most people are not theives. They just want a decent value for the price they pay, and if you're unwilling to provide that, they won't buiy your product.
Under capitalism man exploits man. Under communism it's the other way around.
actually, guns are not soley desined to kill. many guns are made solely for the purpose of target shooting. and before you tell me that target shooting rifles and pistols have been used to kill, remember that although not made for it, steaknives make damn good stabbing weapons.
Guns are like umbrellas and condoms. Better to have one and not need it, than need it and not have one.
No, the gun is a tool designed to propel a projectile at high velocity. People commonly use these tools for sport (target shooting).
The gun wasn't designed to propel a projectile for no reason, or for doing so to participate in marksmanship, it was designed to kill an opponent in warfare.
Sure people have found less murderous uses for the gun, but that doesn't change the difference between the entirely murderous genesis of the gun (the basis of it's existence) and the entirely non-harmful genesis of the DVR.
The two are not synonymous.
Corporation, n. An ingenious device for obtaining individual profit without individual responsibility. - Ambrose Bierce
For those not familiar with homeschooling, there is a hyper-conservative segment of that population that just says NO to television.
Perhaps this legislation is a back-handed means of erradicating liberalisms most useful weapon by denying us the ability to record?
healyourchurchwebsite.com - WWJB?
Up to now, the MPAA has mostly affected geeks, students, or other politically not very relevant groups, and to a large part of the electorate, somewhat mistrusted group. Especially republicans know that they (a) don't vote for them and (b) don't donate.
But if Joe Sixpack can't tape the Superbowl on his TiVo, the phone lines on Capitol Hill will melt.
West Wing
Sopranos
Six Feet Under
Oz
Sex in the City
Live Sports
Just because "Bachelorettes in Alaska Go Bad 3" is on [Fox] doesn't mean we actually have to watch it, nor that it represents the quality TV shows that are available.
"And like that
Try this experiment (at work :)
1. Take a $100 bill.
2. Make a copy of it on your fancy color copier at work.
3. Notice it doesn't come out correctly (or if it does look OK, look for small 'tracing' dots).
And if you really want to have some fun, call a copier repairman, and see how long it takes for the secret service to arrive -- no, really.
"And like that
A friend gave me a Radio Shack 1" TV, which I last used on September 11, 2001. It's in a drawer with the flashlights, extra batteries, and other emergency supplies.
who is sick of listening to the people preaching about how television is nothing but a content wasteland, and how they're somehow better off without it. Expecially those who take an arrogant, "I'm better than you," air to their rant.
If I were to apply that same logic to the Internet, then I'd shout from the rooftops that the Internet is a vast sea of shitty content. But guess what... for all of the "bad" stuff on the net, there sure is a lot of positive here (Internet) as well.
The very same is true for television.
Moderation: 4-Insightful, 2343293847-Flamebait
I do. On all these issues.
And do you know what difference it's made? Absolutely none.
How much of a difference has your writing to your Congressman made?
I just don't know what can be done anymore. Ideas, anyone?
Audere est Facere
...a black box that sits on your cable line between where it comes in the house and before it hits the cable box that just turns the flag off.... it will be sold wildly on the internet, or schematics will be distributed for free, and this will be yet another failed attempt at controlling our lives by the MPAA/RIAA/bigbadmofoco....
Snooze and you lose your sushi.
As has been debated in forum before, government reaction to media giant corporate pressure has always been to treat John Q Public as a thief.
/., so forgive me if I'm rehashing something that's already been rehashed. :)
I'm relatively new to posting here on
The answer is simple. Make ALL TV pay-per-view. Right now, it's the potential loss of advertising and distribution revenue that is driving all these draconian ideas to restrict copying and subsequently destroy fair use.
We should pay for every program we watch. The fee would be inversely proportional to the amount of advertising you're willing to view. This removes timeshifting and commercial skipping from the equation. Subsequent viewings could be discounted.
The very real laws of supply in demand will play a greater role in the product.
To the media companies: Beware! This double-edged sword will make you bring the level of TV programming up to something for which we are willing to pay, as opposed to the garbage that passes for cutting edge TV today. Gimmick TV will be at an end. Also consider the wonderful other streams of revenue that could spring up! Want to watch the entire second season of your favorite show? That's a package deal available for a limited time, so act now! This will protect your distribution and advertising revenue, without destroying our right to fair use. Let's see some creativity and your hard work will be rewarded.
For those of you speculating that you could just digitize the analog signal coming from your PVR to the TV, that's great. It works, and protects fair use since the copies made are of a lesser quality than the original.
Think about it. Supply and demand. This solution simply shifts the model to the consumer and the provider from the provider and the advertiser. Looks like a good way to do it for me.
Keith
--- If you hadn't stayed to read this
The big flaw in your arguement is that there are legitimate uses for firearms. Self Defense is a legitimate use. Hunting and sports shooting are legitimate uses. So it has the same issues as a DVR, it has legitimate uses, but can be used for illegal purposes. A gun is a tool, it can be used for bad and good, which solely depends on the operater.
One of my joys in life are the various signature quotes/mantras/sayings that appear on the message boards. Yours is definitely a keeper. Thanks.
I would like to congratulate all of you who write eloquent replies on Slashdot, however you need to write letters to your "elected officials".
Myself, everytime I read an article on Slashdot which makes my blood boil and pertains to privacy, civil liberties, anti-consumer electronic devices, and/or bad technology legislation, I contact my legislators via email, fax, or snail mail.
Your elected official needs and wants to hear from you on the issues! If they get a mere 10 letters, faxes, or emails on a topic it raises a "red" flag and forces them to look at the issue before unknowing upsetting their constituency.
I urge you to contact these people and let them know what you think on a weekly basis. America is still "Government by the people, for the People."
While you are at it, register to vote!
Lastly, we always hear talk about buying legislation in the form of campaign contributions. Believe it or not, it doesn't cost all that much to buy legislation and once we all get in the habit of contacting our legislative officials and voting, we can donate money to a PAC, donate to campaigns and hire lobbyists. Then the Slashdotter will truly be running with the big dogs, but political involvement has to begin small.
Here are some helpful websites to guide you:
U.S. House of Representatives U.S. Senate Congressional News
I fear if we do not act and unite soon, that we will lose control of the Internet and consumer electronics in the name of Patriotism and anti-piracy.
There are so many issues involved in this industry, and the other similar entertainment industries, it is almost overwhelming. No single plan or argument is correct, or can fix the problems that exist and are coming.
One of the things that will have a very dramatic effect is that it will only get cheaper and easier for individuals to produce movies and music. The recording media is getting cheaper by the minute (hard drive space and so on), the recording devices are getting cheaper (cameras and computers), and the methods of distribution are radically changing. Twenty years ago, it was pretty much impossible for a single person with limited resources to get a movie or video out to more than a few hundred people at best. Now, anyone with the talent can get it out to potentially millions of people (if it is interesting enough). Marketing is dirt cheap, production is dirt cheap, and distribution is nearing dirt cheap. MPAA is going to lose a lot, and they are going to fight it like there is no tomorrow.
I think what we will have in the near future will be commercial free subscription channels, and commercial free subscription shows. You might get some product placement, but the viewer has the ultimate power over what they watch. What you will end up with is a distribution method that brokers getting independant shows to the viewer, essentially, like a for profit PBS.
Thats my opinion, I could be wrong.
Casca
But the basic flaw in your premise remains. You try to contrast guns with DVR's by saying that DVRs have legitimate use, and the illegal uses are an unfortunate side-effect, but the intended purpose of guns is illegal/illegitimate from the start.
The flaw: killing != illegal/illegitimate
Yes, guns were designed to kill. The legitimacy (or lack thereof) of any particular killing, however, is another question entirely. Self-defense springs immediately to mind, as does hunting. Guns are tools, invented to kill. That, by itself, isn't a bad thing. At the very least, it's not necessarily illegal.
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. ..."
If you have to resort to analogies involving time travel, you've already lost the argument.
Come back when you have something meaningful to contribute.
Hokey statistics and ancient misconceptions are no match for a good thought in your head, kid!
And for good reason.
Namely, I never record television programs anymore. If I don't have time to watch them in the first place, it's doubtful I'll get around to watching it later. I tried for a while, and ended up with a collection of tapes I never looked at. Combine this with the fact that the quality of broadcast (or commerical) television continues to go down, and I just sort of shrug.
Somehow, I can see good comming out of this. If commerical television succeeds in upsetting its customer base more and more, I have a feeling consumers will tend to move towards commerical free subscription channels and services. There are great models already in place for this.
1. Pay-per view. For films, this is a great feature. Most services for a one time fee allow you to view a movie as many times and whenever you want in a particular time frame.
2. The 'HBO' model. HBO continues to produce their own content, and as a general rule it's much better then its counterpart on commerical TV. Using digital cable, they can broadcast 10+ channels at the same time (for basically the same fee to the end user). More often then not, if you miss a favorate program, it will be on a dozen more times in the following week.
I wish more commerical stations would take that sort of view, and move towards a subscription service. I can think as an example the TNN channel, which I find myself watching more and more (some neet movies and a ton of star trek re-runs). Would I pay $5 a month for the same content commerical free and unedited despite the fact that its mainly re-runs? Absolutly
Would I pay $5 a month to see the golf channel without commericals? No. I don't need 300 channels of commerical television because 90% of it I won't watch. Would I fight for the right to record the content on those commerical stations? Nope.
The Internet is generally stupid
They'd advertise on the backs of my eyelids if they could get away with it
(after fry wakes up during the underwear dream-ad)
fry: "you people have ads in your dreams!?"
amy: "didn't you have ads in the 20th century?"
fry: "well sure we had ads, but they weren't in our dreams. they were on tv, the radio, the internet, billboards, buses, food continaners, in magazines, in movies...but not in our dreams, nope."
(i'm probably wrong with the details, but you get the point. peace.)
Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored. - Aldous Huxley
"Guns are tools, invented to kill. That, by itself, isn't a bad thing"
Ah... well you see, that's where we disagree.
Corporation, n. An ingenious device for obtaining individual profit without individual responsibility. - Ambrose Bierce
Now where does this check go and how do I receive the ad-free video stream?
Where is our senator in all of this? Why is it that all the PVR, VCR, DVD/CD-R(W) manufacturers and everyone else from HD makers to paper and pen manufacturers can't all get together and buy their own senator. Hell for that matter, why doesn't slashdot buy a senator. We need someone to start standing up for us. Someone who will spread our FUD. We need a lobyist group.
T Money
World Domination with a plastic spoon since 1984
If they would put in a "commercial flag" so my Tivo could accurately skip the commercials completely automatically and seamlessly so I truly got "ad-free TV", I would willingly pay $250/year for it. But it would have to be on all channels...
The DRM shackle (tm) will be foisted upon all of us, because as you know, analog TV broadcasts will be illegal come 2006 or so. Everyone is going to have to buy the George Orwell/Hillary Rosen/Jack Valenti Corporate Media Theft Protector (tm, pat. pending), even for your old 1957 KUBA Komet, complete with shock collars, pupil trackers and catheter for preventing you from missing commercials due to "nature's call".
The deluxe model dispenses beer, snack foos, antacid and feminine hygiene products.
You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
err is the US the ONLY example of capitalism...no, how about the rest of industrial nations ? ALL practice capitalism is some form or another, as to your point, IT IS valid, confidence in the system is lower than it has been since the crash in the 20's, but even then people still believed the government was there to help them. Today I fully believe that the governments SOLE purpose is to make a $$ for its' coprporate handler, and the overall good of the people and the state is totally lost in the for profit rush.
errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
That brief technological mule, the DIGITAL video cassete recorder. Yes you can record on a VCR in analog. But you can also do it in digital. My college roommate and tape trading freak had one that he used. Oh no, digital piracy in 1995!
All this technology just makes the things he already did in 1995 easier. He recorded every episode of the Simpsons and (god knows why) of In The Heat Of The Night. Then he carefully, using frame advance, edited out all the commercials. Perfectly, like studio quality perfectly. He'd also make bootlegs of concerts, audio and video. Then he'd trade this copyrighted material thru the mail with a huge list of tape traders from around the world. He accumulated video and audio bootlegs of all his favorite bands' concerts, all kinds of pirated media. Everyday he'd get and receive packages from FedEx.
The year was 1995. The technology was VCR's and a super-8 handcam. The media giants didn't notice this loss of revenue (who the hell was going to try to market boxed sets of In The Heat Of The Night anyway?) because there was no loss of revenue. Watching the copies of the Simpsons I taped from him just whetted my apetite for legitimate DVD's that didn't get worse and worse with the passing years. I'm sure that today he's one of the gods of gnutella, but the media giants still don't need to worry, because his obsessive consumption of media wasn't limited to pirated, he also spent more money on media than anyone I've ever known, and only had to get all the bootlegs because there is no legitimate channel for them.
...and they've been doing it for years: put utter crap on the air.
--- What?
Just a thought . . .
Right now America's mistrust of corporations and those that run them is quite high.
Maybe this is a new weapon in our arsenal against the MPAA and their ilk.
People are now aware that some CEOs and their cronies used their companies for personal enrichment while shafting everyone else. They used others for their own personal enrichment.
The MPAA is trying to use lobbying and pressure to expand their control and wring more money out of us - previous laws and policies and basic decency be damned.
In both cases it's "we're rich, forget you and what happens to you."
Perhaps this may be a useful way to help Joe Public understand the issues.
Just a thought.
"The Sage treasures Unity and measures all things by it" - Lao Tzu
Some of these bills are the most outrageous that I've ever seen:
"Berman has not introduced his bill yet, but his description says that it will immunize copyright holders from civil and criminal liability who use technological methods such as hacking to "prevent the unauthorized distribution of their copyrighted works via P2P networks."
So, the bill would allow copyright holders to hack into my PC if they feel I have taken their intellectual property. If they do and they don't find anything will I have legal recourse? If not can I hack into Hollywood's computers and poke around? I mean I think maybe they have some of my intellectual property and isn't turn about fair play?
This is truly outrageous. We are suppose to be protected from search and seizure from the government but now this stupid bill would allow Corporations a right of trespass! What's next? Maybe allow Microsoft to break into my home, hold me at gun point and rifle thought my software looking for copies of software that I didn't keep proof of purchase?
Maybe next they can introduce a bill that will allow corporations to punish violators without due process? They find intellectual property without proof of purchase and the corporation can take your equipment maybe?
You know, even if they hack into your computer and find MP3s it doesn't prove that you stole them. We DO have fair use rights and if we own a CD it is perfectly legal to create MP3s and keep them on our PCs. I find it much easier to do that than keep all of my CDs at my desk.
If you haven't figured it out by the tone of this message, these guys are really starting to piss me off!
The race isn't always to the swift... but that's the way to bet!
Kill Your TV
Kill Your TV
Kill Your TV
Cigarettes are a nicotine delivery system. TV is an idiocy delivery system.
With a break comming up for each house, and a even longer back up in paperwork that goes through them, I can see why the MPAA are taking this to the FCC. I can understand why they feel that they need to go to the head of the FCC, the MPAA feels they are not making any progress, going through routes like congress is very risky, the public is begining to catch on to this, the deadline for the HDTV switch is coming up "very soon", and know they will be SOL if they do not get their standard backed, supported and implimented soon.
I would not be supprised if they are doing this to avoid any questinging and oppositions that they might accure if they tried going through congress. What better way to get what you want with out having to go through those costly and damaging route when you can just go to the top? Of course there is the chance that this could back fire on them.
This is a really risky move on their part, in doing so they are drawing even more attention to themselfs, and this has a good probability that this can back fire on them. If they fail they can make matters worse, not only could they have the FCC against them, they can have the opposition from other government officals and government agencys. This can be very costly if they fail and have to go through congress.
When is Jack Valenti going to die? The last time I saw this guy, he was looking ancient. I personally am going to host a party when he kicks off to honor the passing of this remarkable man. And it truly is remarkable how backwards minded this guy is. I find it disgusting that this man is behind a hugely financed movement to hinder technological freedom in the name of profits. Yes, the same can be said for many other industries, but this one hits close to home on the computer front. Anyway, I think I'll throw a fun party with a cake that says, "Jack Valenti, you won't be missed" and colorful balloons, and darts (thrown at a print out of Jack of course), and pirated movies playing, and I'll invite the media too. And to all you who think it's funny, I'm damn serious.
For those who fight for it, life has a flavor the sheltered will never know.
Become a congressman.
The minimum age requirement for a U.S. Senator is 30 years old. 9 years US residency
The minimum age requirement for a U.S. Representative is 25 years old. 7 years US residency.
http://lcweb2.loc.gov/const/const.html
I gave myself to Jesus, but now he never calls
Hey, MPAA, yeah YOU!
You are illegally broadcasting waves of electromagnetic energy through my home and property without my express written permission or concent. These waves consist of digital and analogue encodings of endless hours of mind-altering programming and I demand that you cease and decist at once!
Since the waveforms are passing through my property (and indeed, my own body!), I claim imminant domain rights to them. If you don't wish me to retain ownership of these intruders, you must prevent them from entering my property.
PS: Next time I come over to your house (uninvited) with cheap beer and nachos, you MUST eat them cold (dipped in the beer), because that's how I brought them and you aren't allowed to use them the way you'd like to. You must also accept the road salt I sprinkle atop them as advertising, since I want you to. Oh, and you have to put them together yourself as well, since I can't be bothered with programming on demand.
MPAA/RIAA, you guys need to grow up and get a life.
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
preferably well armed!
If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
In the 1982 House Hearing on Home Recording of Copyrighted Works Jack Valenti said:
I know of no technological device at this time that would bar taping in the home and if it did exist, it would only be a matter of days before the Japanese manufacturers would have an override piece of equipment on their machine and you would start from ground zero again.
So why is he trying to force such a thing now?
Why use the future tense? The past tense works just as well...
Seen on a button or bumper sticker: "Guns don't kill people, I kill people"
Every cloud has a silver lining (except for the mushroom shaped ones, which have a lining of Iridium & Strontium 90)
You're on my foe list. A gun is a legitimate tool for which the user is responsible. Only a government (or you, apparently) would be so arrogant as to take it away.
--
Power to the Peaceful
- I had a lot more free time and I did in fact tend to get productive things done with it.
- Most of the news content on TV can be had better and faster on the Internet.
- TV does have a subtle addictive quality to it that's difficult to detect unless you quit.
- It can be rather difficult to escape from TV, even if you try. There almost always seems to be one on, around the house and in many public places. This is particularly onerous in some airports.
Although I'm watching again, occasionally, I do it even less now, and with the knowledge that it really is a nearly utter waste of my time (and therefore, my life).--Mike
"Not an actor, but he plays one on TV."
The thing is when it comes time to "throw the bastards out" as it were, the instigators are going to be very glad the Founding Fathers had the forsight to put the Second Amendment in the Bill of Rights. It is there for a reason, and not one having to do with frontiers or hunting or killing natives. If you don't believe me read the Federalist Papers. For additional supporting evidence note that most tyrannical governments throughout history have attempted to limit private possesion of weapons.
Happy Fun Ball is for external use only.
Television == Monitor for games consoles.
This sig is part of your complete breakfast.
How is that a flaw in his argument? DVR's have legitimate legal uses, whereas guns don't, so the idea of dealing with criminals instead of trying to prevent criminality by assuming everyone is a pirate... is flawed how? [paraphrasing, not claiming there is no valid legal use for a gun] If the argument works for guns (people commit crimes, not guns), how can it NOT work for a less lethal object? (people commit crimes, not their hardware) It's the same thing, regardless of the lethality of the object. Besides that, a gun is not SOLELY designed to kill... I'm sure the designers planned for maiming and incapacitation too ;)
This sig is part of your complete breakfast.
You have the right to record anything you are sent. PERIOD.
I thought you weren't allowed to record a phone conversation?
Obviously, it's not the same as a broadcasted signal, but it's still effectively data being transmitted to you that you are not entitled to record... without permission anyway.
This sig is part of your complete breakfast.
I would be happy to agree to the MPAA proposal... but first they must convince me that something on TV is worth stealing.
Rehabilitated journalist and web builder No electrons were harmed during the creation of this mess
// //"Guns are tools, invented to kill. That, by // //itself, isn't a bad thing" // //Ah... well you see, that's where we disagree.
Yes, apparently. But it's definately not "illegitimate" in any legal sense, which is the main point of this discussion.
Ack, sorry for the bad formatting. I forgot to press "Preview".
"You'll change your mind after some guy breaks into your house and ties you to a chair, while you watch in tears as he violently rapes then murders your wife. You'll probably go a buy a gun the next day so you can shoot yourself in the head."
Wrong on (at least) three counts, I'm afraid. Firstly I'm not married, secondly I'd phone the police and get the perpetrator thrown in jail, rather than do something futile like kill myself, and thirdly, I live in the UK, where buying a gun is almost entirely illegal.
Your hostile attitude ("You're on my foe list") is interesting. I wonder if there's a correlation between it and your love of guns?
You on the other hand, are on my love list. May you find some of the happiness in your life , that you've evidently lost.
Corporation, n. An ingenious device for obtaining individual profit without individual responsibility. - Ambrose Bierce
"But it's definately not "illegitimate" in any legal sense"
Sure it is. I live in a country where guns are considered illegitimate legally. We'd better not get started on the whole moral dimension, or this will go on forever.
Corporation, n. An ingenious device for obtaining individual profit without individual responsibility. - Ambrose Bierce
correlation between it and your love of guns?
Do you really think that? If so, I'm guessing you haven't done much political discussion in open, online forums--if not, you've been uncommonly fortunate. Unreasonable hostility abounds on every side of any remotely controversial topic.
I forgot to mention that I don't think you know enough about Saeger to characterize him as having a "love of guns". Doing so no more fosters reasonable conversation than his hostility. Granted, his hostility was a bit over the top--he obviously feels strongly about the issue--but you really don't know why. From what I could tell, it was the question of self-defense and defense of one's family that was his main concern.
Aside from the moral question, I'm curious about something. Is your view of archery similar to your view of guns?
Well, first, to go back to the original post I replied to:
:)
"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."
What I really wanted to say was that the NRA, are certainly NOT right. Their slogan should be "Guns don't kill people, they just make killing people more efficient and effective."
If you carry that argument over, then the issue becomes one of the nature of the act that the tool is capable of, and so on. DVR's just don't compare.
And if you apply the new slogan, you probably know my views on archery (it does not compare in terms of scale or damage, to the destruction that a single revolver can do. Or ease of use.
That all said, your question made me re-read the posts in this thread and re-consider the issues that the NRA puts forward (what little I know of them.)
In the UK, the idea that we need to carry or stock-pile guns to prevent the government from visiting totalitarianism upon us, is pretty laughable. But I'm beginning to wonder if it isn't possibly necessary in the US.
All it took Ghandi to overthrow the British Empire in India, was the burning of some id papers, and a lot of people willing to die for freedom (but not kill.)
I wonder if that's true for the American people, and the American Government/Army?
Another question that you've thrown up, is whether the civil war could have been won by the US Citizens-to-be, adopting the Ghandian method?
Corporation, n. An ingenious device for obtaining individual profit without individual responsibility. - Ambrose Bierce
ah have you forgotten who wanted that ruling in the 1990s? the RIAA!
Don't Tread on OpenSource