Bruce Perens Plans On-Stage DMCA Violation

cyber_rigger writes: "From this article at infoworld Bruce Perens said he plans to break the DMCA during a presentation on digital rights management (DRM) Friday afternoon at the O'Reilly Open Source Convention in San Diego. Technically, under the DMCA, Perens' explanation of the technology makes him liable for a fine of US$500,000. You have to admire his spirit."

Comments

Do not try this at home

[Anonymous Coward]

.. it is illegal
and morally wrong

Re:Do not try this at home

[Anonymous Coward]

actually, moron, it is illegal and morally wrong for me not to be able to play a DVD I bought on a DVD player that I own. period. end of sentence. For example, I like to study a certain foreign language in which I am fluent by running the movie with subtitles. I can only do this with VHS unless I am trying to study spanish (or, occassionaly, french) because the CARTELS which have illegally hijacked my RIGHT to USE something that I OWN have put an illegal chip in my machine which prevents me from doing so. Please either stip drinking the cool-aid or shoot yourself.

every tyranny has its clueless apologist.

Re:Do not try this at home

[Anonymous Coward]

It is illegal but not morally wrong.

Re:Do not try this at home

[Anonymous Coward]

Props for the excellent FP troll.

Supreme Court

[polin8]

Lovely, I hope the community can support a case all the way to the court.

Re:Supreme Court

[uncoveror]

This could be the test case that goes to the Supreme Court, and gets the DMCA ruled unconstitutional. The Edward Felten case could have been the one, if it weren't dropped. In the meantime, we should still not buy CDs or DVDs

Re:Supreme Court

[nullard]

In the spirit of Civil Disobediance, he should go willingly if arrested -- he knows he is commiting a crime. Once arrested, he can try to get the DMCA overturned and we can support him financially.

You have to admire his spirit."

[phunhippy]

You have to admire his spirit.

Translation: I'm an armchair activist.

I think everyone should go out and opportunities post information about to break stuff like that "violates" the DMCA.. printing flyers.. posting them everywhere.. hehe even sticking batches of flyers next to dvd players in major stores would be a good start.

Re:You have to admire his spirit."

[Anonymous Coward]

sorry, but not one person here at slashdot has the balls to do that...

remember slashdot members/users = the laziest loudmouths on the planet.

Re:You have to admire his spirit."

[UVABlows]

I think everyone should go out and opportunities post information about to break stuff like that "violates" the DMCA

Except that if most people started doing this and got arrested, their families would go hungry. It's perfect for someone like Bruce, who has a bit of recognition surrounding him to go out and do this. Most people don't care about computer people getting arrested for doing things that they couldn't figure out how to do. The average person thinks it "serves them computer hackers right trying to be above the law." They think the law is morally right and is to be followed without question, otherwise "why would it be the law?"
(The answer: Because the members of our lawmaking bodies are being bought left and right, with the notable exception of Rep. Boucher from Virginia)

Re:You have to admire his spirit."

[renehollan]

1. I run DeCSS, or rather a derivative of it so I can watch DVDs on my computer running GNU/Linux.

2. I am not a U.S. citizen, but am legally on U.S. soil

3. Announcing this publicly places me at significant risk for indefinite incarceration, if the DMCA and Patriot Act were interpreted in the extreme (I may be a technical terrorist, bent on creating economic mayhem in the U.S., by encouraging the use of technology to defeat DRM for purposes of traditional fair use).

Some of us do engage in civil disobedience, at some risk, though perhaps not as dramatically as Mr. Perens. But, laws like this can not ber permitted to go unchallenged.

Re:You have to admire his spirit."

[Myco]

Let's not get carried away here. There's a difference between civil disobedience and breaking the law because you find it inconvenient and don't really expect to get caught.

I favor marijuana legalization, but when I used to pass the pipe around in high school I was hardly engaging in civil disobedience. Nor is it civil disobedience to share mp3s on an anonymous P2P network.

Civil disobedience is a statement -- the action is secondary, a way of showing that you're serious. Unless you're prepared to notify all relevant authorities of just exactly which laws you're breaking and why, don't pretend to be doing it for the sake of freedom.

Re:You have to admire his spirit."

[Anonymous Coward]

You vill report to ze re-education center at 18:00 sharp.

Re:You have to admire his spirit."

[Anonymous Coward]

Bullshit. They can NOT arrest everyone. If thousands of people were doing this, fragrantly, eventually they would have to just give up. Yes, the first would probably suffer much inconvenience and indignities, and even some hardships.. But eventually, they would have to stop enforcing it.

Re:You have to admire his spirit."

[renehollan]

Let's not get carried away here. There's a difference between civil disobedience and breaking the law because you find it inconvenient and don't really expect to get caught.

This is why, even though watching DVDs on my GNU/Linux box is a rather private affair, I am open about how I do it. Perhaps not as open as Perens and others, and thus not as dramatic, but open, and running the risk of arrest commensurate with the act, nevertheless.

Re:You have to admire his spirit."

[tarmo]

Well, not being a US citizen isn't much of a relief for long. The European version of DMCA is coming into effect around EU during 2003, so then we're all ankle-deep in the same sh...ushi.

It's weird to see representatives here in Europe supporting the new EU directive, while DMCA is scorned upon in the US by all except the media copyright holders.

--
Tarmo

Re:You have to admire his spirit."

[Myco]

I understand your point, but I think we may differ even so on our definition of civil disobedience. My feeling is that unless you're really *trying* to get caught, it's just not the same. Being open about it in casual conversation is nice, but you surely don't expect your friends to turn you in. Nor is it likely that someone will track you down via your slashdot posts.

Re:You have to admire his spirit."

[some guy I know]

If thousands of people were doing this [...] eventually, they would have to stop enforcing it.

Just like they've stopped arresting people for posession of illegal narcotics.

Re:You have to admire his spirit."

[Czernobog]

What you fail to realize is that you/we are the society.
And society only follows the laws/rules which it considers to be fair and reasonable.
In other words, they can legislate all they want. If the people ignore them, what are they going to do? Incarcerate everybody?

Re:You have to admire his spirit."

[renehollan]

Your point is noted. No, what I am doing is not dramatic. or particularly risky, compared to the blatent "in your face, up yours" kind of disobedience that Mr. Perens undertakes. I didn't mean to suggest that it was. I was simply responding to the troll (yeah, yeah, don't feed them) that slashdotters don't have the guts to stand up against this sort of thing. Some of us do, and some do so quite deliberately.

As for being tracked via slashdot, that would be easy: my user profile indicates my web site, which implies my registered domain, and voila: I'm easy to find.

Re:You have to admire his spirit."

[renehollan]

You are a fucking pirate...

Funny, I've paid the appropriate copyright holders for all the entertainment content I have. How does that make me a pirate?

Are you seriously suggesting that watching DVDs that I've bought, on my choice of playback, device is "piracy"?

Technically, under the DMCA, it might be criminal (and the whole point of this disobedience), but piracy strikes me as the wrong word.

Re:You have to admire his spirit."

[CousinDave]

I couldn't disagree with you more. By notifying the media, Perens has, in effect, notified the authorities. An act of civil disobedience is just that - an act performed against the civil contract (eg. laws) that one tacitly agrees to to be a functioning member of society. The act is performed both as a statement and out of moral obligation.

Why not apply the concept of region-coding to other media, such as CDs or even books? How about imposing stiff penalties for translating printed media into another language? The DMCA has so many inconsistencies that it begs to be challenged. It is people like Perens who continue to stand up for those of us who don't have the means or the will to act.

Dave

(And why are US laws dictating my freedoms as a Canadian?)

Re:You have to admire his spirit."

[Myco]

I couldn't disagree with you more. By notifying the media, Perens has, in effect, notified the authorities.

You didn't follow the thread of conversation. I was saying that the poster I was replying to was not engaged in civil disobedience. Of course Perens is (planning to be).

Re:You have to admire his spirit."

[whereiswaldo]

Oh come on, you can't compare the two. Law enforcement is very organized when it comes to fighting the war on drugs. The government also has at least the Drug Enforcement Agency. Not to mention the cooperation of most other countries in the world for catching big time druggies.

If everyone did go against the DMCA, there would be little that could be done. Not to mention, it would behoove politicians to do something about it or they wouldn't be making it to the next term. Worst yet, people would more than likely be staging protests.

A good example? Audiogalaxy, Napster. The record industry couldn't really sue every single person on AG, but shutting down the main service took care of the problem mighty quick and more cost effectively. Not to mention, they didn't directly piss off their customers by the thousands which means more potential customers for the future. Also, think about how many people it would affect by suing say 10,000 people. If we're really all only 6 people apart, that's basically turning the entire country (and more) against you on a personal level.

Re:You have to admire his spirit."

[thales]

I agree that this is closer to evading the law instead of civil disobedience. A good example of civil disobedance in this case would be a 100 Linux users sitting on the steps of the MPAA's offices watching legal (not pirated) DVD's on Linux laptops. For a protest of regional encoding you might have 100 portable TV hooked up to modified DVD players each of which is loaded with a DVD legally purchased on the internet from an out of region vender.

Re:You have to admire his spirit."

[guibaby]

Actually your logic is faulty. You can't watch the DVD at Best Buy(R) (or maybe you can) because you are on somebody else's property. If you refused to leave you would probably be arrested for intrudence or trespassing. This has nothing with whether or not you own the movie. A more realistic analogy might be if you were only allowed to watch the movie in your living room but not in your bedroom (a real possibility given the current climate).

In reality you do own a copy of that movie. You should be able to do whatever you want with that movie short of making copies to sell to other people, claiming the work as your own, or creating derivative works with out licensing. Everything else should be fair game.

Re:You have to admire his spirit."

[Jeppe Salvesen]

If all geeks were put in jail, vital infrastructure would fail. What keeps us from being a powerful group? All our damn infighting and lack of coordinated effort. Eschelon day must be the best coordinated geek effort for freedom (unless you count the OSS movement as a "geek effort").

That aside, I wish he would make a stronger point than the right to see foreign DVDs. The DMCA also has security implications that potentially can have a much greated impact on our lives than if the DVDs were five bucks cheaper.

Re:You have to admire his spirit."

[Keyoke]

I hate to say this, but "If thousands of people were doing this, they'd eventually just give up" isn't a valid argument. Thousands of people use drugs every year, and they haven't given up arresting these people.

Re:You have to admire his spirit."

[Danse]

You do realize that we're not too far from a War On Piracy, don't you? It seems to be getting more likely every day. Drugs were legal at one point too. Then the government decided they weren't. It took some time, but things eventually evolved into the sad state of affairs that we see today. I can see the same thing happening with copyright violations. They just need to convince the government that we need to "get tough" on piracy. Is it really much of a stretch to imagine the current administration to go right along with that?

Re:You have to admire his spirit."

[kasparov]

Except that if most people started doing this and got arrested, their families would go hungry. It's perfect for someone like Bruce, who has a bit of recognition surrounding him to go out and do this.

If everyone held to the ideal of, "If I stand up for what is right, I might get mowed down," then their would have been no fight against racial inequality. MLK, Jr., would never have led black Americans across the country to peacefully oppose unjust laws. Supporting unjust laws is the surest way to convince the People in Power(TM) that they can continue to tred upon decency and human rights. I sincerely hope that we, as a group, can begin to show some courage and actually stand up against the corporate bullies and their bureaucrat henchmen who won't stop until they beat us and take all of our milk money.

Re:You have to admire his spirit."

[walt-sjc]

The reality is that they can arrest / fine a good portion of the people. The system can easily handle thousands of people. It does so every day. Most people are not independantly wealthy, and many have families to support. For the majority of us, we just can't risk it. This is why laws work...

Re:You have to admire his spirit."

[MAXOMENOS]

Your arguments fail the common sense test. The DMCA forbids me from playing my legally-aquired DVD, for private screening, using DeCSS -- an action which harms nobody, including myself. This is similar to saying that I can only read a publisher's books using a certain kind of glasses, under penalty to law. It's a specious legal argument intended to save the MPAA from admitting that they bought into a flimsy standard.

Re:You have to admire his spirit."

[UVABlows]

I definitely see what you are saying, but I truly believe we just don't have the numbers that the MLK did in the 60's. I mean, it took A LOT of effort on the protestors part to get the black folks what they wanted (they actually got more, now that discrimination against white people is legal, and discriminating against black people is illegal). They constantly fought, all day and all night for what, 10-15 years? Roughly something like that. Black people are what, 20% of the population, 10% of the population? I don't know, but probably something like that. I'll also guess that there were 200 million people in the US back then, so a rough estimate of the number of black folks is 20 million. 20 million african-americans in the united states during the civil rights revolution. Probably about half did some form of protesting. So we're talking about 10 million people constantly pitching a fit for about 12 years. How many linux users are there in the United States who care about DeCSS being legal or not? This takes away all the people who only use it at work or for a firewall or whatever. I'll take a random shot in the dark, estimating upwards, against my point, and say 3/4 of a million people. We would have to protest constantly for 130 years to achieve the same amount of protestyears/person that the blacks did. And they didn't have to fight any laws. There was no law saying "Hiring black people is illegal." We're fighting against a LAW, not convention. And the politicians value the support of the corporations whose interests they are protecting a lot more than the votes of 1/4 of a million people (guessing about 1/3 of of the people who care about this issue vote). We need the backing of a strong American corporation, or individual (Bruce Perens is an EXCELLENT start) that gets household recognition or we're basically screwed.

If you don't like my fermi techniques, gather the numbers to prove me wrong, I'll willingly accept and encourage corrections.

Re:You have to admire his spirit."

[God! Awful]

Civil disobedience is a statement -- the action is secondary, a way of showing that you're serious. Unless you're prepared to notify all relevant authorities of just exactly which laws you're breaking and why, don't pretend to be doing it for the sake of freedom.

I totally agree. It really bugs me that file "sharing" advocates try to frame the issue in terms of civil disobedience when all the while they are trying to develop a more distributed and more anonymous systems that is immune from lawsuits. At least Perens has the guts to try to turn himself into a test case.

-a

Re:You have to admire his spirit."

[Anonymous Coward]

We would have to protest constantly for 130 years to achieve the same amount of protestyears/person that the blacks did

So? Aren't you committed? The journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step. We must fight them in the Capital. We must fight them in the courts. We must fight them in the streets. We must never never never give up. Whew.. now I'm tired. I think I'll go take a nap.

Re:You have to admire his spirit."

[DrFrob]

Not everyone, just the ones that get in their face. Any law that limits any freedom is dangerous, even if the people do not follow it. For example, you can call a cop a fuckhead to his face, but then he'd be likely to pull out some dumbass law to arrest you or at least give you a ticket ("Hey, since I'm such a fuckhead, let me take a look at that CD you're playing."). This type of activity essentially limits freedom of speach.

Re:You have to admire his spirit."

[Anonymous Coward]

All they need to do is convince the population that piracy is a threat to society in the same manner as they convinced us that drugs were.

(BTW - on the subject of legal drugs.. I still remember an advertisement from around the turn of the last century -Cough Syrup for Children .. now with Cocaine! .. and you thought ADHD was a new thing)

Re:You have to admire his spirit."

[taernim]

*siren goes off, lights spinning*
Cop:"Sir, can I see your license and registration?"
Driver:"Errr, why officer?"
Cop:""Step out of the car please, sir."
*car searched*
Cop:""A-ha. What's this? A CD-R of Metallica tunes? And just where did you get this from?"
Driver:""Er, I own the original... really."
Cop:""Oh? I just bet you do. Damn Napster pansy."
*insert cruel beating now*

Viva la Revolution!

Re:You have to admire his spirit."

[Anonymous Coward]

Bwuahahahahaha.

That's the best post I've ever seen here on slashdot. Hell I'd mod you up to 6 if it were possible. So much of the groupthink here is out of touch with reality but you my good sir, have posted some true words of wisdom.

Bravo, my good sir, bravo.

Re:You have to admire his spirit."

[kasparov]

One of the problems is, of course, that if the entire "people with a clue" industry is jailed, you are left with a bunch of "people without a clue" trying to run all the high-tech infrastructure.

The biggest problem is that geeks, by nature, tend to be non-gregarious. There are lots of small groups of geeks hanging out together, but they rarely all act together on something. I mean, hey, we all value individuality, right? Another problem we face (or at least I do) is that we tend to be lazy about some things. Why confront the system head on, when there are so many holes we can exploit to get around the problem? We all need to take a stand publicly--not just figure out a way to exploit the weaknesses that are inherent in the system.

And the black Americans did have to fight against the law. Many cities had segregation regulations. People were taken to jail for sitting at a "whites only" counter. Even though that is the case, I would argue that it is far more difficult to change a country's culture of discrimination than it is to get a couple of laws changed. Just my two cents...

Re:You have to admire his spirit."

[UVABlows]

One of the problems is, of course, that if the entire "people with a clue" industry is jailed, you are left with a bunch of "people without a clue" trying to run all the high-tech infrastructure.
Your syllogism is correct. The problem is that not everyone with a clue cares about this type of stuff. I know quite a few pretty smart people that couldn't give a rats ass about this that could run high-tech infrastructure.

I agree fully with the laziness issue, I just use xine plugins and watch DVDs, I wrote a letter to Boucher once, but that's it.

I stand corrected on the civil rights fight. Yes, of course they had to fight against laws. I'm not so sure which is harder to change though. Part of the reason they got there 1964 act was because of the popularity the movement was gaining. (Some) People felt bad for the africans because of their centuries-long plight. If the politicians didn't do something, they risked getting voted out of office. No one feels bad for people like us. Most linux users (and people who care about this DRM stuff) are at least middle class, somewhat intelligent people. People make fun of geeks openly in school but continue to hold them in a bit of contempt. Politicans risk very little in not correcting their DMCA injustice.

Looking back it would appear that I'm in favor of sitting back and letting them steamroll over us. I'm not. Something needs to be done. I just haven't seen any viable option arise yet.

Re:You have to admire his spirit."

[zevans]

One of the problems is, of course, that if the entire "people with a clue" industry is jailed, you are left with a bunch of "people without a clue" trying to run all the high-tech infrastructure.

Are you familiar with the telco multinational "British Telecom?" :-)

Re:You have to admire his spirit."

[zCyl]

when all the while they are trying to develop a more distributed and more anonymous systems that is immune from lawsuits.

An unenforceable law is not a law.

Re:You have to admire his spirit."

[Anonymous Coward]

PC Load Letter? What the $@#% does that mean?!

Load letter paper into the print cartridge.

I mean, geeze, is thinking THAT scarce these days?
It doesn't take long to figure out, especially when the printer stops printing.

Re:You have to admire his spirit."

[zorander]

Of course this would arguably be a public exhibition of the material and therefore illegal under laws outside of the DMCA umbrella...so if they couldn't get you on DeCSS they'd surely get you for the other involved violations...then you'd not only fail to make your point, but end up incarcerated for other offenses...

not a good idea

Brian

Re:You have to admire his spirit."

[thales]

Movie Fans Arrested by MPAA"

The purpose of the exercise is to get arrested, and to make the advisary look bad for arresting you. Most of the times Dr. King was arrested he was charged with unlawful assembly rather than with violating whichever civil rights law he was protesting.

Holywood has said too many things about censorship over the years. Any attempt to arrest demostrators is going to make them look bad, real bad. Once I get arrested by the MPAA, I can start yelling things like "The Blacklist mentality of the 1950s has returned to Hollywood"

Re:You have to admire his spirit."

[theNAM666]

>Let's not get carried away here. There's a
>difference between civil disobedience and breaking
>the law because you find it inconvenient

No.

I had the honour of meeting Ms. Rosa Parks about ten years ago, in a small forum. One of the people there asked her if she had meant to make a political statement, or expected such a response, when she sat down on the bus in Birmingham.

Her response was simply, "Heaven's no. I was just tired."

All the political ideologizing around civil dissobedience, like the recent TV movie about Ms. Parks life, misses the core of 'civil disobedience.' Coming from the perspective of society, they act like such disobedience is 'civil' because it is conducted for 'higher' ends, political or otherwise.

Thoreau's explanation in "Civil Disobedience" is much more to the point: civil disobedience is not "civil" (controlled and rational) at its start -- it is the natural act of a being (think Rousseau's noble savage) whose Consciousness rebels against the corruption of civil society.

That is, it is natural disobedience to civil society, because civil society is stupid and corrupt. As in any good political drama, the act comes first, the speech afterwards.

>Civil disobedience is a statement -- the action
> is secondary, a way of showing that you're
>serious

Again, just the opposite. Ms. Parks sat down because she was tired and the law was stupid. It was her natural right, whatever the law, like Antigone burying her brother despite Creon's decree to let the corpse rot on the battlefield.

You bury your brother's body, whatever the law -- duty, honour, family come first. If your body is tired, you sit -- no matter the colour of your skin. For Thoreau, if your country is fighting an ridiculous war in Mexico, you don't pay your taxes -- not as a statement, but because you can't stomach the act of paying for atrocities.

First you act, first you are disobedient, then the world gets to explain. All the politics, all the statements, all the explanations come later. First Rosa Parks sat because she was tired -- and because she was disobedient -- then people and political movements got to explain (and benefit from) that act.

But to say that Rosa Parks was trying to make a statement first, and the act was secondary, domesticates her into the same kind of house-pet-who-follows-the-rules as the police who arrested her. The core was not the statement -- plenty of people said Jim Crow laws were unfair, unjust, racist -- the core was the ACT of disobedience.

And anyone who's using DeCSS, smoking pot, driving above 55 on a four-lane non-interstate highway, or otherwise violating so-called 'laws' because they are ridiculous, is likely doing the same thing. They are refusing to be obedient to society, when natural law and logic dictate against it. They are pitting their action, or, like Rosa, their tired bodies, against the unnatural law of society.

And let the cry go forth: set our data free! What greater burden could come upon the people of this world, than that every word, every piece of data, every picture and sound and thought that might be recorded, come under the control of society (government, corporation, etc.)? That the stories I write to my daughter at night, the whispers in her ear, or my pictures of my dead parents -- that all these personal and sacred moments might need the approval -- and payment -- of Microsoft or anyone else, before I could share them with anyone else. How horrible, to think of scientists or artists needing to conform to the dictates of the Sony/Microsoft/RIAA Church, before they can talk to each other -- and having their communications censored...

It is the exact same situation as the medieval Catholic Church refusing to let commoners read or interpret the "word of G-d" -- and creating a priesthood to stand in between, contolling both sides, profiting from it. (For a very good explanation of the priesthood of IBM, search Google for a copy of Ted Nelson's _Dream Machines_).

It's one thing to have IBM or Microsoft stand between corporations and their data and business processes, bilking them for money in the process. It's quite another to have all of society, all music, all writing, all video, all knowledge, controlled by such a priesthood.

The prospect is horrific. It is also entirely contradictory to the principles of a democratic, free society.

In such a political climate, anyone who uses DeCSS is a patriot, regardless of motive -- and I will remind you that the American "Founding Fathers" were also smugglers and worse who benefited quite nicely from their acts of disobedience to the British king.

> and don't
>really expect to get caught.

Yes, if he doesn't expect to get caught, he's perhaps a weasly patriot -- but again, the point isn't standing up and making a statement (tea party or not). It's taking (natural) action, sharing information freely, using DVDs with Linux systems if you want to, sending a song to your wife when she's in another town -- these are things to be defended, these are the ACTS to be defended. And the question is not whether the person above, or I, or you, or anyone will make a statement and get arrested -- I remind you, that the Boston Tea Partiers ran away after the party -- but, when the time comes, when the British soldiers land, when the fasist comes knocking on your neighbor's door because of his Linux box -- will we stand up as a people, will you stand up, rush to his defense, act against the injustice? Or will we sink away, tell ourselves "at least it's not me," until we become the peasants and slaves of the new Dark Ages?

Definition of Spirit in this case

[flipflapflopflup]

Spirit (noun)
The coming together of balls and stupidity.

Re:Definition of Spirit in this case

[evbergen]

Funny as it may be, I don't think that 'stupidity' accurately describes someone who takes a risk to defend a fundamental freedom. Sorry.

Re:Definition of Spirit in this case

[flipflapflopflup]

I agree entirely. But I just went for the laugh.

Re:Definition of Spirit in this case

[Anonymous Coward]

someone who takes a risk to defend a fundamental freedom

Nor does this describe Bruce Perens. Sorry. The term you're looking for is "someone who takes a risk for a cheap publicity stunt".

Re:Definition of Spirit in this case

[Anonymous Coward]

Where is ripping of music and movie companies a fundamental freedom? I seemed to have missed that part in elementary school.

Re:Definition of Spirit in this case

[guybarr]

The coming together of balls and stupidity.

best definition of a soldier i've ever seen.

Re:Definition of Spirit in this case

[Anonymous Coward]

nice astroturfing, hilary.

*tard.

-ac

Re:Definition of Spirit in this case

[markmoss]

RTFA. What Perens will be doing is NOT "ripping of music and movie companies." He will be discussing a technology, at a conference on that area of technology. That's a basic first amendment freedom. He will break the regional coding on DVD's - IMO, this is fair use, which is protected by the first amendment, and is also sort of allowed by the DMCA. And he will tell the audience how he does this - this is breaking the DMCA, but it's also quite clearly constitutionally protected speech.

By the way, breaking regional coding is not any sort of special accomplishment - I hear that in Australia, right next to the electronics store that sells region-coded DVD players, you'll often find a "repair" shop that will convert the player to multi-region in about five minutes. But according to the DMCA, telling americans how to do this is illegal. B.S. I hope Ashcroft is dumb enough to arrest him.

Re:Definition of Spirit in this case

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow, with 5k1llz like that you should definitely try out for the debate team at your Junior High school!

Re:Definition of Spirit in this case

[alext]

It's relatively common to see region-free players advertised this side of the pond, e.g. at Richer Sounds.

The thing that annoys me are laptops with tightly locked-down DVD drives (e.g. Sony Vaios) - sold with PAL/NTSC output and 240V/110V power supplies so obviously intended to travel, but can only play DVDs in one region!

Bottom line is that I never buy region 2 disks - I'm sure I'm not alone.

Re:Definition of Spirit in this case

[Anonymous Coward]

While this will probably (and rightly) get him some publicity, I think Perens has shown himself to be a thoughtful and deliberate person who values freedom. I hardly think this is just a "cheap publicity stunt." Without something to back it up, your statement is just a personal attack on Perens.

Re:Definition of Spirit in this case

[Anonymous Coward]

It's relatively common to see region-free players advertised this side of the pond

That's because the entertainment industry doesn't own your entire government (yet)

Ssshhhhh!

[shr3k]

Ssshhhhh!! Bruce, it was supposed to be a surprise!!

Re:Ssshhhhh!

[MaxVlast]

At least now the FBI will know where to go.

Re:Ssshhhhh!

[HiQ]

Indeed they do. Yhey've already proven yesterday that they can add 2 and 2 together (moonrocks anyone), so this shouldn't be too hard a problem for them!

I'm suprised...

[nherc]

I'm suprised... reporting that he is going to explain it isn't a $50,000 fine. Have you editors read the fine-print?

Re:I'm suprised...

[gerf]

have you spell-checked and/or previewed your post? last time i checked, 'suprised' had two 'r's in it. so don't be knockin the editors fewl, even though they may karma-whore me down... ^shrug^

Re:I'm suprised...

[Anonymous Coward]

take a chill pill english major.

My question for Mr. Perens

[devphil]

[...]similar to the case with Felten, because the presentation will occur at a conference that is charging attendees, both Perens and the show organizers could be subject to criminal charges in addition to a fine.

[...]

Perens said he is making a habit out of testing the limits of the DMCA, mainly to show just how trivial most DRM technologies are. Last year at the O'Reilly conference, he delivered a presentation during which he showed attendees the slides that got Sklyarov arrested.

Damn, Bruce, how do you walk with balls that big?

Re:My question for Mr. Perens

[warmcat]

I have only slightly smaller balls than that, and I am able to walk because my wife keeps them in a jar.

Re:My question for Mr. Perens

[truesaer]

The difference here is that he is an American. American's don't mind if foreign people are arrested, but will probably take issue with an american being arrested for an academic presentation. A little strange, and sad, but I think it is somewhat true.

Hopefully they will arrest them....I know these days constitutional rights are not in style, but you would have to think a court would rule that an academic presentation is speech. How could they not?

Re:My question for Mr. Perens

[ramdac]

You're right. What do we care if someone else gets arrested for this? This is an AMERICAN law after all. The only way we'll defeat it is if someone IN America fights against it. It has no meaning in other countries.

Re:My question for Mr. Perens

[Anonymous Coward]

Damn, Bruce, how do you walk with balls that big?

Kind of like that but without the horse head.
http://www.planparties.com/images/photos/H- Hippity %20Hop.jpg

Re:My question for Mr. Perens

[blue trane]

Re your sig: I disagree. Technology can facilitate communication among members of a society so that social problems may be identified, discussed, and resolved more efficiently than they would be otherwise.

Re:My question for Mr. Perens

[dillon_rinker]

Rock on, my man...I'm laughing almost too hard to type.

Re:My question for Mr. Perens

[warpSpeed]

Hopefully they will arrest them....

If "they" don't arrest him, can future arresties argue selective prosecution?

Re:My question for Mr. Perens

[Jucius Maximus]

"The difference here is that he is an American. American's don't mind if foreign people are arrested, but will probably take issue with an american being arrested for an academic presentation. A little strange, and sad, but I think it is somewhat true. Hopefully they will arrest them....I know these days constitutional rights are not in style, but you would have to think a court would rule that an academic presentation is speech. How could they not?"

Exactly. The thing with Sklyarov is that he was a russian and even though his case exposed the contradictions within the DMCA, it ended up being a rather low profile thing and Adobe ended up dropping it.

I think Perens is hoping he gets arrested and that he probably has his legal aid all lined up already. His planned presentation is probably set up so that if he was prosecuted, the prosecutors would have to contradict themselves and the DMCA in order to use it to prosecute, exposing the madness within it and hopefully forcing the judge to overrule the law.

I think secretly Perens wants to be the hero of the anti-DMCA movement.

Re:My question for Mr. Perens

[gilroy]

Blockquoth the poster:

I think secretly Perens wants to be the hero of the anti-DMCA movement.

Then more power to him. I don't care whose ego gets fed, if the end result is the repeal of the DMCA and the restoration of sanity to intellectual output law.

Re:My question for Mr. Perens

[Jucius Maximus]

"Then more power to him. I don't care whose ego gets fed, if the end result is the repeal of the DMCA and the restoration of sanity to intellectual output law."

I'll drink to that.

Re:My question for Mr. Perens

[darien]

I think secretly Perens wants to be the hero of the anti-DMCA movement.

If this is how he goes about his secret plans, God help us if he ever decides to do anything overt!

Re:My question for Mr. Perens

[dmoynihan]

Somebody had to be the hero...

I'm parroting a wimpy line here from Eric Eldred--a guy who has "extracted" public domain texts on his website from culled from Barnes & Noble ebooks in Microsoft's Reader format, but of course doesn't know a thing about Tripod's Techodude, and his posted method for pulling .txt from .lit.

Mr. Eldred said to me that he would have let his method be known, but, with the Supreme Court case and all...

Personally, I have too many readers now to get shut down over nothing, ulp, but am I allowed partial credit for convincing Gutenberg to go down under and take advantage of the copyright laws there that say Gatsby and 1984 are public domain?

Nah, I'm just a wuss.

Go get 'em, Bruce!

Re:My question for Mr. Perens

[Software]

If "they" don't arrest him, can future arresties argue selective prosecution?

No, because "somebody else got away with it" is not a valid legal defense. The district attorney has the sole right to prosecute, or not prosecute criminal cases. I'm not sure how it works in federal cases like DMCA violations, though. I guess the US Attorney for that area has the right. "Selective prosecution" is applicable to trademark violation defense, but it has little value elsewhere.

#include (but I've read Scott Turow novels)

Re:My question for Mr. Perens

[Anonymous Coward]

If "they" don't arrest him, can future arresties argue selective prosecution?
No, because "somebody else got away with it" is not a valid legal defense. The district attorney has the sole right to prosecute, or not prosecute criminal cases.

But the DA cannot go around discriminating for or against a certain group. ie: The DA can't prosecute all the Blacks who jaywalk, and none of the Whites who do so. That's Discrimination.

Besides, the original poster said If "they" don't arrest him. Arrest. Arresating is up to the cops, not the DA. And again, they can't be picky who they do/don't arrest. Racial Profiling, anyone?

Re:My question for Mr. Perens

[lovebyte]

If his balls are that big, I am sure he'll make loads of friends in jail!

Re:My question for Mr. Perens

[linzeal]

What race is bruce perens?

Sounds English, maybe?

Re:My question for Mr. Perens

[Anonymous Coward]

It's not his balls that are that big. It's just that his enlarged head looks like a scrote.

Re:My question for Mr. Perens

[Anonymous Coward]

Mr. Perens ought to dress up like Mr. bin Laden to emphasise the point Mr. Perens wants to make.

Re:My question for Mr. Perens

[Anonymous Coward]

Ever hear of an "easement"? It's legalese for "somebody else got away with it".

Re:My question for Mr. Perens

[Anonymous Coward]

Best..post..ever.

Re:My question for Mr. Perens

[StevenMaurer]

Mostly true, but not totally. If it can be shown that prosecution is being selectively applied only to a class of individuals, the courts have been known to toss the entire law.

This comes from a case in the early 1900s in San Francisco where there was a law against laundromats, but only Chinese laundromats were being shut down. The white-owned ones were allowed to operate.

I agree that this wouldn't apply in Mr. Peren's situation. Still, he's totally safe. There's not a prosecutor in the US who would try him unless they wanted the DCMA at least partially invalidated. Academic speech merits the highest form of protection.

Re:My question for Mr. Perens

[Elwood P Dowd]

No, it isn't. Not at all. I guess yanal.

Re:My question for Mr. Perens

[warpSpeed]

Still, he's totally safe. There's not a prosecutor in the US who would try him unless they wanted the DCMA at least partially invalidated.

IANAL, but that still seems to be to be selective. If he broke the law, he needs to be prosecuted. If they are not prosecuring him, because he falls into a certain class.... Did he break the law or not? Could this not be used as a club to get the law thrown out?

Re:My question for Mr. Perens

[markmoss]

It depends on how the class is defined. If it works out that the group prosecuted is highly correlated with one of the "suspect" categories (color, nationality, religion, etc.), then the courts are going to toss it out. If it's primarily "people so dumb they speed even when the cops are out there with the radar gun", then arguoing that 99.9% of the speeders don't get caught isn't going to get you anywhere. (Arguing that the radar is inaccurate or the cop doesn't know how to operate it might. But if you've got the combination of tech knowledge and courtroom smarts to carry that off, you could get paid $300/hour somewhere, so why are you spending days preparing to fight a $100 ticket?)

Or in this particular case, the non-prosecuted class might be "professors specializing in DRM technology, when discussing their findings with other specialists in the field". That might tend to tilt too much towards white males, but it's going to be awfully hard for a white male techie caught modifying DVD players for profit to claim that he is the victim of prosecutorial discrimination...

Re:My question for Mr. Perens

[sinserve]

Bruce Al-Perens is Palestinian.

Re:My question for Mr. Perens

[zevans]

Nice summary of the dangers of broken legislation. Hello, DMCA (and RIP in the UK, of course.)

It won't be some major cracking effort.

[Neon Spiral Injector]

I'd guess his demonstration won't be something on the order of breaking the encryption scheme on DVDs. It will be something so obvious, that people will wonder, "why is that illegal?". Just to so how silly the DMCA is.

Re:It won't be some major cracking effort.

[gerf]

i agree wholefartedly.

Businesses aren't geared toward the hacker/knowledgable group. They're geared toward the people who barely know how to set the time on their clocks, who just pick up a DVD and assume it works. Now, if too many of them have the problem of something not working... and i mean a lot of them... them alternative means *cough hacking cough* would probably have a noticable impact on their customer base. and thus cash flow. and thus, they care. that's what it'd take.

Re:It won't be some major cracking effort.

[MindStalker]

The article states that he bought from ebay a DVD player that had the region encoding hacked off of it (guess he didn't feel like he had the time to do it himself, shrugs) and will give a lengthy explanation on just how to do this yourself. This isn't btw a DVD player that has a secret region free feature, this was as I can best tell from the article a firmware hack.

Re:It won't be some major cracking effort.

[eyepeepackets]

"Excellent karma? How am I supposed to know if I'm a more valuable human being than you?"

Funny sig. I've been shooting for the catagory "Fan-fscking-tastic!" but it just won't go up. You ever seen the following? (Old usage for the word "gay" of course.)

From years of study and of contemplation
An old man brews a work of clarity,
A gay and involuted disseration
Discoursing on sweet wisdom playfully.

An eager student bent on storming heights
Has delved in archives and in libraries,
But adds the touch of genius when he writes
A first book full of deepest subtleties.

A boy, with bowl and straw, sits and blows,
Filling with breath the bubbles from the bowl.
Each praises like a hymn, and each one glows;
Into the filmy beads he blows his soul.

Old man, student, boy, all these three
Out of the Maya-foam of the universe
Create illusions. None is better or worse.
But in each of them the Light of Eternity
Sees its' reflection, and burns more joyfully.

Herman Hesse
Attributed to Magister Ludi Joseph Knecht
The Glass Bead Game

Re:It won't be some major cracking effort.

[aggressivepedestrian]

I'm risking karma, but the previous comment was moderated up to a 5 when it seems pretty obvious the author didn't read the original article.

You don't have to guess what his demonstration will be. If you RTFA (read the fucking article), it tells you exactly what he's going to do. Come on, folks. Give a little thought to your moderation.

Re:It won't be some major cracking effort.

[Neon Spiral Injector]

I'll even admit after I read the article, after I posted I was like, "oh, there goes some karma". But now I see myself modded to 5. Oh well, I guess as long as I'm not reading the moderators don't read either. Sort of like there is some strange universal balance.

I hope the presentation goes up on the Web

[seosamh]

perhaps on a site hosted in some country that protects its citizens' right to free inquiry, and expression.

Re:I hope the presentation goes up on the Web

[Anonymous Coward]

Does Neverland have a net connection?

Re:I hope the presentation goes up on the Web

[dacarr]

You want free speech? Go to North Korea.

Atta Boy....

[tanveer1979]

Perens admits, "what happened to Dmitry could conceivably happen to me as well." However, he said he is willing to take the risk.

Thats a spirit... or is it? If he gets arrested and then jailed nothing would have been accomplished. Only if Lawyers can get him off the hook after he's done this, then it will be a victory.

But something tells me thats is being too optimist...such things happen in fairy tales.. or maybe i am too paranoid.. given the situation.

But every law has a loophole... and the day somebody finds it in here... we can all go home :-)

Re:Atta Boy....

[Anonymous Coward]

Thats a spirit... or is it? If he gets arrested and then jailed nothing would have been accomplished.

Sure he could get arrested. Then the government has to face down a Million Nerd March on Washington, D.C. I'll be there.

Re:Atta Boy....

[markbthomas]

Or perhaps the newspapers will get to print:

"American Man Arrested For Playing a DVD."

Sounds like something from the Onion...

Re:Atta Boy....

[PastorOfMuppets]

"If he gets arrested and then jailed nothing would have been accomplished."

Never underestemate the power of martyrdom.

Re:Atta Boy....

[Anonymous Coward]

I think the government would be more afraid of ESR, armed and alone, than a million computer geeks in a peaceful protest.

Re:Atta Boy....

[Zathrus]

If he gets arrested and then jailed nothing would have been accomplished

Uh... I think you miss the point.

He intends to be arrested. And jailed. And to fight the law in court, which is the only place it's ever going to be overturned.

If he doesn't get charged with a violation of the DMCA then nothing will have been accomplished -- failure to enforce a law does not invalidate the law (there are caveats, but a singlular failure does not do so).

I don't think he's looking for a loophole. I suspect he's planning to violate it in the most flagerant manner possible to ensure that he's charged with violation.

The tricky bit is to violate the DMCA and only the DMCA. You really don't want to violate the DMCA and half a dozen other laws -- even if you get the DMCA ruled unconstitutional you'll probably be celebrating in jail.

Re:Atta Boy....

[FreeUser]

Thats a spirit... or is it? If he gets arrested and then jailed nothing would have been accomplished. Only if Lawyers can get him off the hook after he's done this, then it will be a victory.

It is called civil disobedience, and it is often the only way to get injustice corrected (and the DMCA is extremely unjust).

If enough people are arrested for outrageously stupid reasons, public awareness of what is happening will be raised. I remember telling a non-technical friend of mine, who is a pilot for a major airline and served in the airforce (and saw combat in Yugoslavia), about the arrest of Dmitry and he was outraged. In fact, I don't think I've ever seen him as angry as he was that day. He took that injustice very personally, as do most people who believe in the ideals of democracy and not the rule of corporate oligarchs, cartels, and monopolists.

The more lay people that are made aware of these injustices the better, and Perens is going a long way toward accomplishing this, whether or not he gets arrested. The excesses of copyright have only succeeded these last decades because the awareness of what has happened (chronic copyright extentions, and now fundamental changes in its nature from a civil to a criminal law, and from a largely commercial regulation to a profoundly invasive personal one) has been absent. Copyright law, in its current form, will likely not withstand public scruitiny very well, which is something that would be good for every one of us (returning it back to its pre-1970 duration, if not repealing the notion altogether and replacing it with a gentler, non-monopolistic regime for compensating authors and artists, but that is a discussion for another day).

Raising public awareness of these issues is probably one of the most important things we can be doing, and if we as technically knowledgable people do not do so, no one will. Bruce Perens should be applauded for stepping up to the plate and putting his personal liberty on the line for the greater public good.

If we had more people willing to do this sort of thing when the despots seize personal liberty after personal liberty we would live in a much better world. He is a man who clearly feels strongly enough about software freedom to risk jail time, up to 5 years, which is a hell of a lot more grave than the $500,000 fine mentioned in the article (I wonder why they played that down. That makes his actions even more impressive).

Re:Atta Boy....

[hesiod]

> If we had more people willing to do this sort of thing

Heck, I'd be willing to do something like that in a second, but unfortunately I am not as well known as Mr. Perens, and the effect would be nowhere near as grand. That said, hats off to you, Bruce!

Re:Atta Boy....

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't think he's looking for a loophole. I suspect he's planning to violate it in the most flagerant manner possible to ensure that he's charged with violation. [emphasis added] The tricky bit is to violate the DMCA and only the DMCA. You really don't want to violate the DMCA and half a dozen other laws -- even if you get the DMCA ruled unconstitutional you'll probably be celebrating in jail.

Pretty much. Sure, he wants to violate the DMCA flagrantly and notoriously. The trick is to being doing something constitutionally protected when he violates it. Like advocating a change in the law, which is one of the core kinds of speech most strongly protected in the U.S.

He can optimize the effect of his disobedience by finding the most clear, direct, high-stakes (in terms of so-called "damage" to the industry) violation of the DMCA that overlaps an activity that enjoys some constitutional protection. The thinner the constitutional protection his chosen activity enjoys, the better, because his case could then break the law more completely. However, that's flirting with failure. If he guesses wrong, he could lose and wind up in prison.

Re:Atta Boy....

[MadAhab]

So how did you explain the eBook case to your non-technical friend? It can be quite difficult to do so.

Re:Atta Boy....

[Anonymous Coward]

He is a man who clearly feels strongly enough about software freedom to risk jail time, up to 5 years, which is a hell of a lot more grave than the $500,000 fine mentioned in the article (I wonder why they played that down. That makes his actions even more impressive).

Hey, 5 years in jail would be worth it if it means getting away from my wife and screaming kids so I can think and write in peace. Do they allow laptops in jail?

Re:Atta Boy....

[pmz]

...failure to enforce a law does not invalidate the law...

If it did, there would be no traffic laws. I would bet that traffic laws for speeding, turning without a signal, etc., are enforced perhaps 1% of the time (at least in the U.S.). For example, I was ticketed for speeding once, even though I was blatantly the slowest car on the road (why? hint: I was an easier target).

Re:Atta Boy....

[Anonymous Coward]

This brings to mind Martin Luther King's Letter from a Birmingham Jail

"I hope you are able to ace the distinction I am trying to point out. In no sense do I advocate evading or defying the law, as would the rabid segregationist. That would lead to anarchy. One who breaks an unjust law must do so openly, lovingly, and with a willingness to accept the penalty. I submit that an individual who breaks a law that conscience tells him is unjust and who willingly accepts the penalty of imprisonment in order to arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice, is in reality expressing the highest respect for law."

Re:Atta Boy....

[Bearpaw]

He is a man who clearly feels strongly enough about software freedom to risk jail time, up to 5 years, which is a hell of a lot more grave than the $500,000 fine mentioned in the article (I wonder why they played that down. That makes his actions even more impressive).

Probably because most folks -- me included -- have no clue about what it's like to serve time. I dunno if it's just people in the US, but there seems to be a big mental black hole about the subject, aside from some fairly common shallow self-righteousness about how "soft" prisoners have it.

(Yeah, most folks don't play with that kind of money either, but extrapolation makes it easier to empathize with.)

Re:Atta Boy....

[qlmatrix]

If he doesn't get charged with a violation of the DMCA then nothing will have been accomplished -- failure to enforce a law does not invalidate the law (there are caveats, but a singlular failure does not do so).

Yes, and for that reason an attorney who wants the DMCA to persist won't move his fingers when Bruce holds his speech.

Re:Atta Boy....

[Anonymous Coward]

Many people are willing to protest, for so long as they don't consider the actual consequences of doing so.

Those which truely understand the consequences realize have conviction, the ret suffer from the illusion of power.

Re:Atta Boy....

[liquidsin]

But since he's being so vocal about his intentions, I'd imagine they pretty much have to go after him. I'm no lawyer, but couldn't people use the government's inaction as a defense in the future? Won't it look like egg on their faces if someone flaunts the fact that they're committing a crime and nobody does a damn thing about it? If nobody does anything can he get one of the EFF lawyers to come after him just to get this thing into a court?

Re:Atta Boy....

[qlmatrix]

You should be right. The requirement of the police and attorneys to prosecute every crime they get to know of (principle of legality) should force them to do it. But this doesn't necessarily mean they also do what they ought to. I'm not sure what the consequences for an attorney could be when not prosecuting a crime. I think a disciplinary action could be the consequence -- since I'm not a lawyer and not quite involved with the US judicial system I cannot really tell. But I think at least in Germany it wouldn't be possible for someone in the future to use such a one case of inaction for defense. This would be different if it would show up that such cases are in general prosecuted arbitrarily - but this would still be hard to be proved.

Re:Atta Boy....

[guttentag]

Anyone taking bets on whether he gets arrested on Thursday night for some mundane offense like jaywalking.

He steps off the curb a moment before the "WALK" sign lights up and three men in suits and shades appear. The one who's not restraining one of Perens's arms says, "Bruce Perens, you are under arrest for jaywalking."

In some cases, simply stating your intent to commit a crime is a crime in itself, even if you never follow through on your stated intent. I wonder if they could arrest him on the grounds that a credible source (Perens himself) tipped them off to the fact that a crime was going to be committed.

Re:Atta Boy....

[Pxtl]

We both know it would be a million nerd DOS attack. Nerds don't walk - it excites their asthma.

Re:Atta Boy....

[Anonymous Coward]

The Gun God you and ESR worship has feet of clay.

Re:Atta Boy....

[Pxtl]

Mod the parent up - its a damn good post for an AC.

US

[dark-br]

America: Home of the free (and the DMCA, MPAA, RIAA...)

Re:US

[markbthomas]

You mean home of the FREE*.

(* -- Federation for the Regulation of Everyone and Everything).

Re:US

[Anonymous Coward]

Or was it home of the FEE
Licence fee, fines etc

Region Codes

[Anonymous Coward]

so how exactly do you circumvent the region coding for DVDs?

Re:Region Codes

[Mr_Dyqik]

You go to a shop in almost any country in Europe, and buy a DVD player that has been hacked by the shop or the manufacturer. It can actually be quite difficult to find a DVD player that isn't region free, particularly at the cheap end of the market.

Re:Region Codes

[Anonymous Coward]

The point is, WHY should it be this way? Why must you go out of your way to get a "hacked" player...it shouldn't be like this AT ALL to begin with.

People just gladly accept the status quo of region nonsense by saying "just get a hacked player". I'm sorry, but that's not a good answer--the answer is to do away with region encoding entirely. It needs to be declared "price fixing", and therefore illegal.

Re:Region Codes

[wallsaroundme]

Check out http://elby.ch/english/fun/software/index.html for region killer, a way to defeat region codes on Windows. Or you could use the tried and true dcss programs out there. As for non-computers, I am clueless.

Re:Region Codes

[B. Vhalros]

Sadly, it is not this way in the US because of the DMCA.

Re:Region Codes

[Anonymous Coward]

Thats the point, you're not going out of your way to buy a region free player. Most supermarkets in the UK sell them. The fact that they are region free is a major selling point.

Re:Region Codes

[alecbrown]

Not true in the UK. The UK is sort of Europe.

Re:Region Codes

[tarmo]

And even if you don't get a hacked player, you can just check the net for information on players. Most players can be "hacked" by a blindigly simple program that just turns one bit in the player's BIOS.

But hey, that's circumventing a DRM, so it's illegal in the US, and shortly in the EU as well.

--
Tarmo

Re:Region Codes

[Hrshgn]

Well in this case i guess it doesn't hurt THAT much because all the hollywood movies come out much earlier in the US than in the rest of the world.

Re:Region Codes

[Anarchofascist]

You go to a shop in almost any country in Europe, and buy a DVD player that has been hacked by the shop or the manufacturer.

Excuse me, but did you just offer to the public a means to circumvent a technological control measure?

Re:Region Codes

[will_die]

Where it is nice, from a US citizen standpoint, is that various US TV shows are released in DVD in Europe before they are in the US and for a lot cheaper.

Re:Region Codes

[csteinle]

While it's true you can't get region free players in Dixons or Comet (who's staff are so brain dead they tell people that they are illegal), you can easily get them in high-street AV specailists. Like Richer Sounds, for example.

(And no, I don't work for them or have any other interest in them appart from buying stuff.)

Re:Region Codes

[csteinle]

Balls. Pressed submit when I meant to press preview. Try here instead.

Re:Region Codes

[Midnight Thunder]

I walked into a hi-fi/video store in the UK and asked about DVD players. I didn't even ask about region encoding, and the sales guy mentioned that it was region free. I asked the guy about it and he says they get modified standard.

Re:Region Codes

[hysterion]

Sadly, it is not this way in the US because of the DMCA.

Well in this case i guess it doesn't hurt THAT much because all the hollywood movies come out much earlier in the US than in the rest of the world.

Well, there are movies being produced elsewhere than in Hollywood. The whole Region code trick certainly helps Hollywood keep that competition out of the country, doesn't it?

You can't just buy French movies from FNAC over the internet and play them on an US player. (Yes, last time I was in Paris I did check that it wouldn't work because of the region codes, and it did prevent me from buying a few TV show DVDs.) How's that for unfairly rigging the market?

Re:Region Codes

[JoostT]

In the Netherlands you can buy dvd-players (I have one) that are region free from the factory, not "hacked"

> But hey, that's circumventing a DRM, so it's
> illegal in the US, and shortly in the EU as well.
I don't think so, circumventing copy protection maybe, but not regioncodes.

Joost

Re:Region Codes

[Mr_Dyqik]

No, I pointed out that every specialist AV shop, and all the big supermarkets (including Asda, who are owned by Walmart) does this, and it's completely legal.

What's the point of a region system if it's completely and openly flouted? All it does is reduce MPAA profits.

Re:Region Codes

[Anarchofascist]

No, I pointed out that every specialist AV shop, and all the big supermarkets (including Asda, who are owned by Walmart) does this, and it's completely legal.

I was trying to be funny - evidently without much success :)

All I was saying is that the DMCA can be taken to absurd lengths. Technically, you provided me with a service (posting a message on slashdot for me to read) on how to break the DRM measure known as "region encoding". You told me I can buy unencoded players in Europe. If you are in the US, or if you ever visit the US, you can now probably be arrested for giving me this information.

I'm seriously considering making all my visits to the sights in the US (Space shuttle launch, Disneyland, Grand Canyon, Las Vegas, and CmdrTaco's collection of amusingly shaped turnips) very soon, because I'm bound to break the DMCA sooner or later, and the FBI will subsequently arrest me at the airport.

Spirit?

[mccalli]

Technically, under the DMCA, Perens' explanation of the technology makes him liable for a fine of US$500,000. You have to admire his spirit.

Never mind the spirit. You have to admire his bank balance...

Cheers,
Ian

Re:Spirit?

[passion]

I'm sure that we could start a collection. Hell, a simple slashdot political activism bank account. If we could get as many people hit that as do the greasy pizza-box web server... he'd be out in no time.

Re:Spirit?

[Anonymous Coward]

not any more... ;)

Re:Spirit?

[Anonymous Coward]

So he gets a fine of 500k and then gets his face and story all over billions of web communities, selling t-shirts and books, and becoming an icon for freedom. 500k is a small price for a few million plus popularity bonuses.

THEY r listening

[dark-br]

I would awnser that but i don't have US$500,000 nor a good lawyer to get me off the hook afterwards. :p

Yawn

[Anonymous Coward]

Slashdotter does something stupid.

Article at 11.

Trial?

[Quantum Singularity]

If he does get arrested for this, which I think he should not, the following trial may prove one thing: The DMCA is (partially) unconstitutional. I think enough people would voice their opinion that it would herald a major change.

Though he didn't really have to be so open about it.
"If you can get away with DMCA violations, why not?"

Re:Trial?

[ramdac]

you're right--absolutely right. If he gets arrested, I say take this thing to the supreme court. The first amendment should override the DMCA any day.

Re:Trial?

[inherent]

If he does get arrested for this, which I think he should not, the following trial may prove one thing: The DMCA is (partially) unconstitutional. I think enough people would voice their opinion that it would herald a major change.

While I agree in spirit with this comment, I think you miss an important point:

A Court is the entity which may strike down laws based on their unconstitutionality. Courts are (at least in theory) not swayed by public opinion.

If you want to deal with an organization that is intentionally swayed by public opinion, then you need to be speaking about Congress. That's where we citizens can go to have laws (regardless of their constitutionality) changed.

Re:Trial?

[jonnythan]

Partially unconstitutional? It either is or it isn't, the law either stands or is struck down by the Surpreme Court. They can't knock down sections of it and rewrite it.

Re:Trial?

[Gorm the DBA]

Ummm...actually...they can. The Supreme Court regularly says something along the lines of "We find this clause of the regulation/law to be unconstitutional". That's why most bills that go through Congress have clauses that say something like "If any section of this bill shall be found unconstitutional, the remainder shall remain in force" (or words to that effect). Or for that matter, so do most legal documents (read one sometime, there's almost always a clause in there that says if one clause is found illegal, the rest stay in place).

Why don't more people do this?

[Pooh22]

Disclaimer: I'm from the Netherlands, so the heat is still a few kms in front of me...

What I don't understand is that Bruce Perens is an exception to the rule. Whatever happened to civil disobedience as a way to make unambiguously clear that the government has gone too far and needs to rethink it's policies.

If Americans don't stand up more forcefully, the US will either infect the whole world with their orwellian shite or (I sure hope this happens) they will at some point in the near future be ignored as something that a free country cannot follow without losing essential freedoms.

Three cheers to Bruce Perens and anyone who follows his example!

Simon

Re:Why don't more people do this?

[Anonymous Coward]

If Americans don't stand up more forcefully, the US will either infect the whole world with their orwellian shite

This, coming from an EU citizen...

Re:Why don't more people do this?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm an American. And you are why I LOVE foreigners and hate Americans. 90% of them are so caught up in their shallow existences they've forgotten they live in a world with other people. This is just my opinion, but a society raised on television has nothing left to shock it. And a society that isn't shocked won't stand up to fight :(

Re:Why don't more people do this?

[Anonymous Coward]

>What I don't understand is that Bruce Perens is an exception to the rule. Whatever happened to civil disobedience as a way to make

I suspect it is because the vast majority of citizens in the US dont know, or dont care.

Re:Why don't more people do this?

[Anonymous Coward]

I suspect it is because the vast majority of citizens in the US dont know, or dont care.

I do have to agree with you that the vast majority of US citizens don't know they have rights nor do they care.

Re:Why don't more people do this?

[Anonymous Coward]

If the EU makes you nervous now, wait till Russia joins!

Re:Why don't more people do this?

[AlgUSF]

At the risk of being moded flame bait. If you don't like it here, then move! Most american's don't care. How many Joe 6-packs roll their own DVD Players or Computers? It only matters to people like myself and the rest of the slashdot crowd. This is our fight, and we have to fight it ourselves.

Re:Why don't more people do this?

[haa...jesus christ]

Don't kid yourself- this is endemic of Western civilization, not just the US. Although arguably the majority of what we consider Western civliziation is US in nature, but I digress.

I don't know if I would draw a love/hate line in such terms, and I'm sure you're generalizing, but there is meat to your statement. Americans have become rather docile, due to media saturation and a general ambivalence which is part and parcel of capitalism. Not that I'm a commie or anything, but few people have perspective on the system in which they live. I strongly recommend reading Erich Fromm's Escape from Freedom, which I'm actually going through right now. It draws on the reformation as a baseline (specifically Luther and Calvin and their systems and the transition from medieval to free market economics) and illustrates how we have the opportunity to be free, but couch ourselves in pursuits that do anything but- i.e. the passive viewing of television, etc. Anyway, I think I'm starting to hallucinate from lack of sleep, so I'll shut up. Read the book if you get a chance.

Re:Why don't more people do this?

[Anonymous Coward]

Look around your country you fucking moron. Get off your computer and take a walk around it. See the imbeciles that pass as AMERICANS. YOU are exactly the type of American I HATE SO FUCKING MUCH.

Re:Why don't more people do this?

[ZaneMcAuley]

I cant wait until Russia joins the EU :D

The EU pisses of the US big time (look at our GPS project - they hate that because it is going to make the US monopoly on this system take a beating.)

I am glad the EU is standing up to alot of EU bullying and bullshit. If anybody can, its the EU.

Regional coding is illegal in the NZ i believe under anti competitive laws. Good on them.

I think its just a sad fact that the UK is the puppet of the US. The US's domination of Earth will be seriously challenged over time by the EU.

And the US doesnt like that one bit. Good.

Re:Why don't more people do this?

[rlwhite]

Simple. 1. The average person doesn't know or understand. 2. Most people can't afford the legal cost of defending civil disobedience now.

Re:Why don't more people do this?

[Anonymous Coward]

The only imbecile I see is you. Here's your plane ticket.

Re:Why don't more people do this?

[Anonymous Coward]

Excellent stuff :)

Try looking up Michel Collon a Belgium journalist. He's right inline with what you are saying

Re:Why don't more people do this?

[Jucius Maximus]

If Americans don't stand up more forcefully, the US will either infect the whole world with their orwellian shite or (I sure hope this happens) they will at some point in the near future be ignored as something that a free country cannot follow without losing essential freedoms.

you have been added to my 'friends' list

Re:Why don't more people do this?

[sckeener]

If Americans don't stand up more forcefully, the US will either infect the whole world with their orwellian shite or (I sure hope this happens) they will at some point in the near future be ignored as something that a free country cannot follow without losing essential freedoms.

I agree with you. Americans are cowards. We fear going to prison, losing years, and facing the fact that for every job afterwards we'll have to explain why we committed a felony.

I think I'll stick to presuring my congressman. I'm sure that $500k fine could buy a ton of them.

Re:Why don't more people do this?

[inkfox]

I think I'll stick to presuring my congressman. I'm sure that $500k fine could buy a ton of them.

You are so out of the ballpark. Buying a congressman for $500k is about as likely as buying a Cadillac with gumwrappers.

Re:Why don't more people do this?

[Anonymous Coward]

I think its just a sad fact that the UK is the puppet of the US.

Yeah, that is sad.

GOOD PUPPY!

Re:Why don't more people do this?

[Anonymous Coward]

DEAD WRONG!

I think a vast majority of the US citizens don't know that they DON'T have rights. I think a vast majority still believe they have the rights prescribed by their liberal forefathers.

Re:Why don't more people do this?

[linzeal]

Luther and calvin were just new masters, we need NO MASTERS.

Re:Why don't more people do this?

[Anonymous Coward]

Not to mention getting raped by Bubba. American prisons turn a blind eye to this, and there have even been American TV commercials, paid for by government, pointing out that if you break law X, you'll get raped in prison. These incidents are not prosecuted at all, and by some reports are actually encouraged.

Re:Why don't more people do this?

[the_machine]

What I don't understand is that Bruce Perens is an exception to the rule. Whatever happened to civil disobedience as a way to make unambiguously clear that the government has gone too far and needs to rethink it's policies.

Because the average American doesn't have the resources to challenge something like this in a lengthy court battle.

I know that if I were to take up a cause like this, I'd get some public defendant attorney that is handling 20 other cases. The press wouldn't pay any attention to me. I'd end up in jail, lose my career and my wife. I know I'm probably too apathetic, but it's just not worth it for me to take a chance at screwing up my ever-shortening life.

Re:Why don't more people do this?

[Anonymous Coward]

I am glad the EU is standing up to alot of EU bullying and bullshit. If anybody can, its the EU.

Truly profound statement. I see you are typical of the "great thinkers" coming out of Europe these days...

Re:Why don't more people do this?

[Anonymous Coward]

Just as great as the ones comming out of the US and UK :D

Re:Why don't more people do this?

[return 42]

Oh, civil disobedience is still practiced in the US. But most people who do it are concerned with greater evils like the SOA, nuclear weapons, or the stolen 2000 election. Not many people can see the dangers inherent in DRM yet.

Re:Why don't more people do this?

[Tom7]

... and you post as anonymous coward. Well, stand up to fight!

Re:Why don't more people do this?

[elefantstn]

Then leave. We have plenty of bigoted people here, if you want to buy a plane ticket and reduce that number by one, I for one would be glad to see it happen.

Re:Why don't more people do this?

[sckeener]

You are so out of the ballpark. Buying a congressman for $500k is about as likely as buying a Cadillac with gumwrappers

I'd say $500k is pretty good. Especially since offical records say Enron only paid 118k to Bush for his bid to presidency. 118k to get a veto power...sounds like a slamdunk with 500k.

Re:Why don't more people do this?

[alwaldauer]

Although I disagree that 90% of Americans don't care about anyone but themselves, I do agree with the testament that a society that isn't shocked won't stand up to fight. Unfortunately, Mr. AC's statement that a society raised on television has nothing left to shock it is untrue. In the 1970's America was shocked by live pictures streaming in from the Vietnam war. Pictures of thousands being deported from Bosnia shocked the nation into reacting. I think the reason so few are reacting about laws like the DMCA and the Telecommunications act of 1996 is that few people see the negative long term effects of those legislation until it is too late. Fewer still congressment and legislators step forward to challenge these laws (some congressmen didn't even know what they were voting on... they just passed the law knowing that doing so would mean more bucks for the next campaign). I think now that the results from the Telecommunications act are beginning to surface (WorldCom's collapse can be contributed to the rapid and unregulated expansion that the Tel. Act allowed), maybe it will spur enough people into action to take a look at what their elected representatives are doing to their country, and then hopefully the problems will fix themselves. I have to admit, I have my doubts, but to return to the parent poster... Foreign countries have their problems too. France has recently taken dangerous leanings to the right and the rest of Europe appears to be ready to follow (even England is shifting to the right beyond America). Italy still remains among the only modern Democratic states to convict those guilty of blasphemy (a legal term not used in the United States history).

Re:Why don't more people do this?

[Anonymous Coward]

The US's domination of Earth will be seriously challenged over time by the EU.

Maybe it will. Too bad that by the time it happens, EU may be just as bad as US, or at least it seems so, looking the way we are heading.

Re:Why don't more people do this?

[Anonymous Coward]

You have been added to my "annoying asslicker" list.

Re:Why don't more people do this?

[Anonymous Coward]

US = capatilist (corporate bound)
EU = socalist (people bound)

Big difference.

Re:Why don't more people do this?

[gmhowell]

Too much to lose. Read my journal for info on where I'm coming from, but I don't have the luxury of being able to be incarcerated to fight a law. Not for this. As someone else mentioned, maybe for Vietnam or something along those lines. But DMCA is nowhere near as egregious.

Most of the classic US protestors of the 60's were middle class kids, whose parents told them to look out for others, do the right thing, etc. Problem is, those protestors' contemporaries didn't teach their kids (me and other 20-30 year olds) the same thing. Or at least without the same fervor. The failures of the protests (culminating in the Kent State massacre) took the wind out of the proverbial sails of protest.

In addition, there have been many laws passed as a response to those protests that make it much harder. If you read some of the other comments, the trick with Mr. Perens is to ONLY break the DMCA. If he breaks some other law, he will be charged with that. Protesting is difficult: you try to denounce (just to pick something) the law against underage drinking, and wind up breaking 12 other laws. The real cause gets lost.

Finally, there is no media interest (at least in the US) in portraying anything outside the status quo as positive. Look at the World Bank meetings that have been disrupted. Rather than examine the reasons for the protests, the message they are attempting to spread, etc. the media covers the disruption, the damage to property, the cultural aspects (oh, look at all the cute kiddies trying to protest) while almost 100% ignoring the message.

I don't think there is any one reason, but there are a million little ones. These are just some of the highlights. But, I think that Kent State has a lot more to do with it than I ever realized, now that I think about it.

Re:Why don't more people do this?

[Anonymous Coward]

For the time being, EU may be a little be more socialistic, but it doesn't seem to stop those byrocrats in brussels or wherever they are from trying to duplicate DMCA, software patents, anti-privacy and just about everything else that makes US the place it is.

Re:Why don't more people do this?

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe they will, but I am sure it wont be the same as the US. Regional coding et all are ANTI-COMPETITION technologies. EU is against that also. Maybe it will be more balanced/realistic than the DMCA in the US.

Re:Why don't more people do this?

[MrResistor]

So do something about it. As many famous thinkers have pointed out; whoever wishes to change the world must start with themselves. I don't see you standing up and fighting for your rights. If you were, you'd be proclaiming it to the world and not posting as AC.

Until you have the balls to stand up and do something yourself, like Tom7, Bruce Perens, Felten, etc, you should shut the hell up.

Re:Why don't more people do this?

[Anonymous Coward]

EU is also implementing a ban on SPAMMERS :D

I cant wait for that one :D How is that for personal privacy :D

I think the EU will protect its people MORE than the US currently does. While the US keeps up this silly trade war, the EU just gets stronger and stronger. Look at GPS, look at Genetically modified foods the US is trying to con people into buying by NOT labelling them (the EU bans them until they are labelled accordingly - more people protection).

Capatilism = Corp. only matter, not people.
Socialism = People come before corps.

I think the EU will not become as bad as the US with regard to its protection of people's rights.
I think it will be the opposite.

Look at the EU human rights directives, look at the consumer protection they have. The US has nothing on them.

Wait until Russia joins, and they will in time. Can you imagine how the US would react :D

Re:Why don't more people do this?

[Seelo]

> I agree with you. Americans are cowards. We fear going to prison, losing years, and facing the fact
> that for every job afterwards we'll have to explain why we committed a felony.

I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me a nice comfortable job with 401K matching and stock options.

Re:Why don't more people do this?

[parliboy]

Maybe they should. One of my pet projects over the last three years has been the computer-illiterate neighors. I went with them then to pick out a name-brand computer that would suit their basic needs. I went inside it with them (and their kids) to teach them what was what and how to break a computer down and put it together. Then they added CD-RW, I stood back and oversaw while they installed it. When they're ready to upgrade, I expect them to be able to build it themselves with basic supervision. Yeah, I suppose it might be more profitable in the short-term to charge them $100-$200 to do it myself, but I think it's to the greater good to have as many tech-savvy citizens as possible. So, your homework: find someone in your neighborhood and do the same with them. Lather, rinse, repeat.

Re:Why don't more people do this?

[Anonymous Coward]

That's cause you're just another sorry excuse for an American that would rather live in a fascist state and be told what to do than to live in a country where your freedom means a bit more than some corporation's desire to make people pay for the right to do damn near anything. I'd prefer it if you would leave. Move to China or something. You'll probably be happier there.

Re:Why don't more people do this?

[5KVGhost]

No, you're mistaken. Americans practice civil disobedience all the time. It's practically second nature for Americans to ignore or defy laws that they don't think are necessary or just. Heck, defying authority is practically a reflex action over here.

In most cases this is actually a pretty effective strategy. Contrary to what some might believe, law enforcement folks have opinions and priorities too and they're generally no more anxious to waste their time with dumb laws than anyone else is. There are lots of laws hanging around that are never really enforced except under highly unusual circumstances, and when they are enforced those laws generally get a lot of active (and usually negative) attention.

Unfortunately there are other times when this isn't such a good strategy, and when our national habit of "ignore the law and it'll go away" is less effective. The DMCA is probably a good example of this. Folks will gleefully violate it whenever it's convenient and say when asked how foolish the provisions are, but many people don't realize how bad it would be if the provisions of law were vigorously enforced. DMCA advocates see this as a danger too, which is why individuals are almost never targeted by the law. That's when someone like Bruce Perens can force the issue, changing it from an academic debate into a real issue that less involved people realize might effect them too.

Re:Why don't more people do this?

[thoughtcrime]

Don't speak for me. Just don't. You want to measure your newly-trendy patriotic wang next to mine, fine. Just don't try to speak for me. Don't use the royal 'We' when you speak of your own narrow troglodyte views. You are the reason many otherwise decent Americans are hated and loathed abroad, because you are merely perpetuating the awful stereotype. Speak and write as much as you like, but don't be so wussy as to try to cloak your personal bigotries in the stars and stripes we all have to wear. Okay? Okay.

Re:Why don't more people do this?

[porkface]

Bruce is an exception because it's getting to the point in the USA that most citizens feel that unless they're rich and powerfull, they could be thrown in jail for a cause, and nobody would take notice or care beyond their mother.

We sure don't feel like Congress is listening when they hold meetings on new legislation proposed by Disney and their cronies, and the consumer and tech lobbies are blatantly ignored and not allowed to speak. Ironically enough, this is why apathy is rampant, and voter turnout has been around 30% for awhile. And it's safe to say that the public is being ignored more often in the halls of Congress BECAUSE they don't vote or stand up for themselves.

But take heart international community... We're Americans, and while we may be lazy, when it comes down to it, we will stand up and fight once pushed far enough. Besides, it's about time for the 60's to come back into fashion.

Re:Why don't more people do this?

[Anonymous Coward]

I certainly won't speak for you. I said that people who lump all Americans together in one bad stereotype are fools who think they understand everything but don't. But apparently your dismal reading comprehension didn't let you figure that one out. Speak and write as much as you like, but take a few English courses before you say anything. Okay? Okay.

Re:Why don't more people do this?

[Anonymous Coward]

I know who Perens and Felten are, but who is Tom7?

Re:Why don't more people do this?

[Anonymous Coward]

+5? It's not a bad post, but there's no content. He just babbles on a bit about something or other that doesn't really make any sense, but boils down to him saying some standard, unsupported anti-American tripe and saying he doesn't like TV. Whee! Not to mention, it's totally offtopic.

Are you anti-American types really so hard up for expression that you have to mod this crap up? I'm all for open discussion, but this is what the culture section in k5 is for.

great idea

[tps12]

I love the idea of grabbing "mindshare" (/me crosses himself after uttering evil marketingspeak) through good old-fashioned media whoring. Circus ring tactics are essential in the modern computer business. Remember Jay Leno's TV special introducing Windows 95? Or when that Microsoft dude was dancing or whatever? Steve Jobs practically invented tech-biz dramatics.

This will only help in the battle to get Free Software and the FSF taken more seriously by the public. Maybe we can arrange to have someone dressed in a Tux costume as well. Juggling burning Windows XP CDs.

Great!

[Anonymous Coward]

We appreciate this so much, Bruce!
Thanks from the Italian gang, all our support.

odo@autistici.org
www.autistici.org/loa

some more hacktivism: www.dsec.info

And after the presentation...

[CLIT]

He'll put on his Village People outfit and sing "It's fun to violate the D-M-C-A!".

Good luck. I hope he gets further than Sklyarov.

Re:And after the presentation...

[Pig Hogger]

He'll put on his Village People outfit and sing "It's fun to violate the D-M-C-A!".

You mean his global Village (people) outfit???

Re:And after the presentation...

[godber]

Actually, if he puts his outfit on and signs while he does his presentation, that makes it a performance. Does he gain any protection from the first amendment. Perhaps if he changed his presentation into an interpretive dance ....

Its absurd that this is a demonstration.

[B. Vhalros]

The fact that something like this is a demonstration shows how foolish a law the DMCA is. Basically, this is a presentation showing people how to play their own DVDs and yet this is some how illegal. The absurdity of this is stupendous. Hopefully, this will serve to enlighten people as to the idiocy of such legislation.

Re:Its absurd that this is a demonstration.

[Anonymous Coward]

Of course it is idiotic. Will it enlighten people? No. Bruce is just preaching to the choir.

Most people do not care because the DMCA and the DVDCCA idiots haven't affected them yet. The vast majority are NOT using Linux to play their DVDs...they are using fully DVDCCA approved DVD players. Ergo, it's no inconvenience to them whatsoever, and they won't care one whit.

By and large, DVD consumers are far too blinded by the new, bright and shiny toy that DVD provides. It still blinds them to obvious inconveniences like Macrovision and non-fast-forwardable FBI warnings (and now, commercials). Heck, most North Americans won't even have problems with region encoding, so why would they complain?

As far as DVD is concerned, our only hope is coming from overseas...I hear New Zealand has ruled that region encoding is price fixing (and therefore illegal), and I hear rumblings from european countries that the same will be happening there. Hopefully, soon, region encoding (and by extension, CSS) will be found to be wholly illegal (as it deserves to be).

As for the DMCA...well, you Americans are on your own there. The last thing the monied interests want is a court-based challenge to it.

Re:Its absurd that this is a demonstration.

[Karn]

Bruce is just preaching to the choir.

Nonsense. He is making a scene, similar to the scene that Skylarov made unintentionally..
The press will eat it up, and the general population will know a little bit more about the DMCA than they did yesterday.. For Bruce, mission accomplished.

Thanks Bruce. If he catches hell from this, I've got some cash to throw his way for some bail :)

Break the DMCA? Sure

[Anonymous Coward]

Here we go, la de da de, I'm linking to a website which contains information on how to circumvent the region coding DRM techonology in a DVD player, la la la

Except I'm not in the US.

Where do I send the money?

[Sly Mongoose]

OK, I suppose half a million of us will all have to chip in a buck to bail his arse out of Jug. So where do I send the dollar?

Re:Where do I send the money?

[Anonymous Coward]

Doesn't Perens work for HP?

As a hardware maker, HP (as well as IBM) are on record opposing the DMCA. Presumably he's got his company's legal backing in this matter.

Re:Where do I send the money?

[ocbwilg]

OK, I suppose half a million of us will all have to chip in a buck to bail his arse out of Jug. So where do I send the dollar?

I'd rather my dollars go towards his legal defense rather than paying unjust fines.

Re:Where do I send the money?

[birdman042]

Send it to the EFF.

Re:Where do I send the money?

[zoward]

Right here.

Re:Where do I send the money?

[linuxlover]

arrg, not again. We just got Sklyarov(sp?) freed. I am still tired from the demonstrations and collecting money ..*sigh*

Re:Where do I send the money?

[jsse]

I'd rather my dollars go towards his legal defense rather than paying unjust fines.

I'll contribute my part if he ever got arrested. Arrogant he may be, but I always like his attitude toward unjustice.

Why is it illegal?

[Anonymous Coward]

Why in the hell is it illegal to modify property that you already own? That just doesnt make sense. If I build my own DVD player from scratch and it can play any region, why should that be illegal? So does this mean I am not allowed to alter my microwave to play DVD's?

Re:Why is it illegal?

[JWW]

I think that's his point. I break the DMCA all the time with DVD's on my linux box.

Re:Why is it illegal?

[phil reed]

Why in the hell is it illegal to modify property that you already own?

Of course, you don't "own" the software in the player. Look in the manual someplace and you'll find a "license agreement" that tries to tell you that you don't own the program that runs the DVD player. That's the idea, anyhow.

Re:Why is it illegal?

[Anonymous Coward]

Why in the hell is it illegal to modify property that you already own?

Welcome to Dick Cheney's America.

Re:Why is it illegal?

[Anonymous Coward]

why should that be illegal?

It shouldnt be, that the whole point STUPID.

Re:Why is it illegal?

[Anonymous Coward]

Why is it illegal? Because that DVD player is not really completely your property. You don't have any rights to the way the board was designed, the way the chips and other components are interconnected, the software in that device, right down to the twelve dozen patents on that laser diode. In short, what you do own is the mass of carbon, silicone, and assorted metals, but NOT the way it is organized.

On a related side note, you do not even own any rights to your own genome. If we find a useful gene sequence in your DNA we can patent that and turn it into a profit without you ever seeing a dime. No buddy, no tampering no modifying no trying to get around the system.

Re:Why is it illegal?

[troc]

The patent would be on the APPLICATION of that sequence FOR A SPECIFIC purpose. Th patent would not be a blanket "ownership" of the sequence - as, for a start, you have prior art for that :)

Troc

Re:Why is it illegal?

[superid]

The DCMA was enacted in 1998 and obviously predates Dick Cheney by several years.

Re:Why is it illegal?

[MORTAR_COMBAT!]

it isn't illegal to modify that property. it is illegal to modify that property, and then tell other people how to do it.

great country, isn't it, sometimes.

Re:Why is it illegal?

[oingoboingo]

In short, what you do own is the mass of carbon, silicone, and assorted metals,

whoa buddy...i'd like to take a look at your DVD collection! I wanna see the behind the scenes special for 'Double-D Delights'.

Re:Why is it illegal?

[gilroy]

Blockquoth the poster:

On a related side note, you do not even own any rights to your own genome.

On a side note, I've seen it said that the best antidote to the ridiculous genome patenting that occurs is, believe it or not, copyright law. After all, your genome is at least as much like code as like a machine... since it need mRNA to function, it's not really a machine (by itself) at all.

Do you think Microsoft would accept the argument by Intel that "Our chips use that code to do word processing, and therefore our patents give us ownership of the code"? Of course not. Likewise, your gene sequence is your gene sequence. If a drug company tries to isolate a gene from you and use it, sue them under copyright!

Esoteric legal point: It might have to be your parents who sue, as they "authored" the sequence. And it might be that all of humanity is a derivative work of a work which has passed into public domain.

Re:Why is it illegal?

[3nd3r]

What hole did you crawl out of? Just because Cheney was not Vice President at the time, doesn't mean he wasn't a mover in DC. Too lazy to post links. HE was also in the Older BUSH's circle of genius's...

Re:Why is it illegal?

[Anonymous Coward]

Seems to me that Bill Clinton was in the White House in 1998, and Dick Cheney was in private industry. Hmmmm.

Re:Why is it illegal?

[Anonymous Coward]

Aw, c'mon, what are you *thinking*? That the slashbots who try to blame Bush/Cheney for every wrong on the planet are actually going to let the *facts* get in the way? You gotta be kidding me....

Re:Why is it illegal?

[c13v3rm0nk3y]

I think others have touched on this, but I don't think I saw a reply that said simply: "you don't own commercial software".

You have a license agreement that allows you to use the software (with some restrictions). You don't own the software in the DVD player any more than you own your copy of Mac OS or Windows.

The hardware has patents to protect it. You can own it and do what you want with it in your own home, just don't try to use their ideas in your device. If you kill or blind yourself making your microwave into a DVD player, you agree not to sue them.

The software, however, is another thing. On a microwave, it's embedded enough to be considered "hardware". Sanyo isn't going to care (much) if an individual hacks their timer/power interface. However, a DVD player is a specialized computer system that reads and decodes information off supplied media so it can be muxed/demuxed off to a variety of data streams.

Re:Why is it illegal?

[nagora]

DCMA was enacted in 1998 and obviously predates Dick Cheney by several years.

I'm sure Dick Cheney is more than four years old.

TWW

Re:Why is it illegal?

[agdv]

The DCMA was enacted in 1998 and obviously predates Dick Cheney by several years.

Whoa! He sure looks older than 4 in all those pictures... :-)

Re:Why is it illegal?

[mark_lybarger]

have the shrink wrapped license agreements been held up under court? i realize that all software vendors put them there, but can you really purchase something that you can't use unless you agree to terms that aren't disclosed prior to purchase time?

to my knowledge a hardware dvd player is just that harware that reads media. pretty basic. one should be free to modify the haredware (with addidional hardware or software if needed) as they see fit to get their particular needs met. it may void warranties but that's no big deal

Re:Why is it illegal?

[Amazing Quantum Man]

I think that's his point. I break the DMCA all the time with DVD's on my linux box.

Please remain where you are. The FBI will be there to arrest you shortly.

Re:Why is it illegal?

[Corporate Troll]

I'm sure Dick Cheney is more than four years old.

Mentally? I'm not so sure ;-)

Re:Why is it illegal?

[Hrothgar The Great]

Clinton signed the DMCA. Take a look again at who supports the entertainment industry most - it ain't the Republicans, buddy.

Re:Why is it illegal?

[EllisDees]

How many times does it have to be said: without a signed agreement, there is no contract. I own the software in my computer and dvd player in *exactly* the same way I own a book. I put my money down and walked away, which is called a sale - not a license.

Re:Why is it illegal?

[MrResistor]

Posession of a circumvention device is illegal under the DMCA.

IIRC, IANAL.

Re:Why is it illegal?

[c13v3rm0nk3y]

By opening this package, you agree to the following... if you don't like what this agreement says, feel free to return the opened software... our lawyers are bigger than god, so good luck getting your argument to stick... w3 0wn th3 c0d3, and give you a limited license to use it on a single CPU... all your base belong to us...

Re:Why is it illegal?

[Anonymous Coward]

"Why in the hell is it illegal to modify property that you already own? That just doesnt make sense. If I build my own DVD player from scratch and it can play any region, why should that be illegal? So does this mean I am not allowed to alter my microwave to play DVD's? "

Of course it's illegal to modify property that you own if you do so in a manner that would make that property illegal. This is nothing new. You are free to alter your microwave however you please, but if your modifications release 1000 watt microwaves outside of the microwave, then the FCC is going to be knocking on your door. Also, it is perfectly legal to own fertilizer and fuel oil, however mixing the two together to make a bomb is against the law. There is nothing wrong at all about these laws and you are a moron for thinking otherwise.

Re:Why is it illegal?

[PhilHibbs]

And it might be that all of humanity is a derivative work of a work which has passed into public domain.

Derivitive works of PD works are subject to copyright. If I do a new translation of something by Socrates or Critias, I own the copyright on the translation.

Re:Why is it illegal?

[EllisDees]

"By opening this package..." is not a contract in any sense of the word.

Re:Why is it illegal?

[royalblue_tom]

It was forwarded to be signed by the president (a democrat) after being approved by both houses (republican controlled at the time).

Will people stop blaming one president or party over another. The law was passed by the government - over the years, this is a gestalt entity of both parties ...

The only reason you assign blame for something is because someone is going to be punished because of it. Assigning blame so you can go "Nya nya nya - it was you!" is childish, stupid, and doesn't achieve anything.

Now let's get back to the MPAA explaining why Bruce can't watch DVDs he bought on holiday in the UK when he got back to the states ...

Re:Why is it illegal?

[shotfeel]

...or just rewrite the agreement on the package, then open.

Re:Why is it illegal?

[dmarx]

I only have a "liscence" to use commercial software? I don't own that copy? I don't get to do anything I want that doesn't involve making another copy? I guess that means that I can break my Windows XP CD in 2, send it to Microsoft with the liscence certificate and sales recepit, and get a new CD right?

Re:Why is it illegal?

[c13v3rm0nk3y]

Now, that's the best idea I've heard all day!

M'boy, I like the cut of your jib. You're hired!

Re:Why is it illegal?

[c13v3rm0nk3y]

Within a timeframe (probably determined according to retail law in your area), you can certainly return it for new media. The wording of any EULA is careful to distinguish between the "media" and the "software".

Re:Why is it illegal?

[Kaboom13]

Im really tired of hearing this. I love it when I hear from (non-technical) people that hacking is "illegal". Those shrinkwrap licenses dont mean crap to me. When you buy something, you agreed to a contract that takes precedence. That contract involved you giving them money, and them giving you said product. You know own that product, whatever it may be. You are free to do whatever you want with it (provided it is not illegal under existing copyright law) and they have no right to stop you or hinder you. Those licenses mean nothing as far as I'm concerned. If they don't want me to tinker with said product, they never should have agreed to sell it to me. They have recieved fair and just compensation (as decided by them, not me) it is now mine. If they want to "license" me under a restrictive license, my consent would have to be gained at the time I bought said license.

Re:Why is it illegal?

[zorander]

A prime example of this would be Zondervan's control over the NIV bible translation. Sure. the Bible is PD but the NIV translation (Which is one of the most popular here in the northeast US) is copyrighted and costs $$$...(whereas I can download older translations like that of King James( from Project Gutenberg or something (being that it's a few hundred years old)...

Brian

Re:Why is it illegal?

[c13v3rm0nk3y]

If they want to "license" me under a restrictive license, my consent would have to be gained at the time I bought said license.

Amen, brother. This is the whole idea behind free (as-in-speech) software. The problem is convincing the rest of the world.

Another problem is convincing a corporation's lawyers that "You are free to do whatever you want with it ... and they have no right to stop you or hinder you".

Then again, in the bizniz world where companies really care about these licenses, there are actual contractual agreements so everyone is on the same page. Even then, things can go awry.

The simple fact is that companies can, and do, use the EULA as a big stick to get people to do what they want with their software. Judges are inclined to agree with them, AFAICT. The game is rigged from the start.

As far as they are concerned, you do not own any software that has a EULA that says you are only granted the right to "use" said software. It is essentially and provably illegal to modify, reverse-engineer or otherwise muck with the software they sell you. You have few rights because you only own the "media". Whether this is right or not is certainly open for discussion. Whether you can be sued by a publisher for breaking this agreement is not. They can, and they will.

At least, this is my understanding. I tend to disregard the EULA on everything I own, like 99.9% of us. I may not even care that much. That doesn't change the fact that it's still a binding agreement in many courts.

*shrug* I suppose this is exactly why we need alternative licensing options like Copylefts and the BSD license. Stallman wasn't just being a paranoid asshole. Not this time, anyway.

That last part was humour. It's funny. Laugh.

Re:Why is it illegal?

[Anonymous Coward]

Excellent commentary.
SAlu2 . luis

Lot of money....

[Hall]

So, what company or companies have already agreed to pay the fine if he gets in trouble over this ?? Sure, maybe the guy has got money, but literally throwing away a half-million dollars just to prove a point seems plain stupid to me !

Re:Lot of money....

[ocbwilg]

Sure, maybe the guy has got money, but literally throwing away a half-million dollars just to prove a point seems plain stupid to me !

I guess that rather depends on how important you think that point is. You may not believe in anything strongly enough that you would spend $500,000 to take a stand, but obviously there are other people who do.

about civil disobedience

[kipple]

I wonder what will happen if such mr. Perens refuses to pay the fine for the DMCA violation. What will happen? Will they put him in jail for civil disobedience?

I think an individual has the right to disobey to a law that he thinks it's not only useless, but also damaging to the community. If you think this is never true, think about that: 30 years ago black people could not sit in the front part of a bus. Was it right? No. It was a law that didn't affect anyone individually if it was not obeyed.

I know the issue is big, those are only my thoughts. I hope mr. Perens will take a stand against DMCA, and I hope that the media will farily cover this situation.

I also hope for my personal pig to start flying, but that's anoter story.

Re:about civil disobedience

[tomstdenis]

I think an individual has the right to disobey to a law that he thinks it's not only useless
This is the very essence of everything democracy isn't.

Tom

Re:about civil disobedience

[Diabolical]

I think an individual has the right to disobey to a law that he thinks it's not only useless, but also damaging to the community.

Hmm.... i think the laws regarding killing my obnoxious neighbours is totally useless and certainly damaging our community. So does this mean i can go out and shoot them?

Off course you should have the right to challenge laws but you do not have the right to disregard them just because you feel like it's too restricting or useless. You still have to obey the law in general. Civil disobedience does have it's limits. Certainly where it comes to crimes against humanity. So, in this case it has it's use but do not proclaim it for using it in general..

Re:about civil disobedience

[fyonn]

you do not have the right to disregard them just because you feel like it's too restricting or useless

of course you do. you can do what you like. hack dvd players, reverse engineer software, kill people. you can do anything you like. you must just be prepared to face the consequences. bruce here is breaking the law and it appears that he is expecting to face the consequences. thats fair enough and it's his method of trying to get a stupid law overturned.

perhaps you think murder is a stupid law and should be overturned. go out, kill people, go wild, whatever. then you'll probably get arrested and if you like, you can make your case. perhaps the general public will believe you and that law will get overturned. it's the same principle.

as a matter of interest, everyone in the europe at least has the right and indeed duty to disregard any law that they consider unjust. this was determined by the nazi war crimes courts when faced with excuses of "I was ordered" and "it was the law"

"yes" they said, "you were ordered but that does not mean you should have done it. you should have refused and taken the consequences, even if it was death" (or wrds to that effect, and don't ask me for references, look em up yourself (for that read "I don't have any")).

dave

Re:about civil disobedience

[cainem]

LOL. The only reason this law exists is because it was paid for. That isn't democracy.

Re:about civil disobedience

[cainem]

i think the laws regarding killing my obnoxious neighbours is totally useless and certainly damaging our community. So does this mean i can go out and shoot them?|

Unless you're a psychopath, I very much doubt that you think the law against murder is useless and damaging.

You've got a (moral, not legal) right to do whatever you think is right, whatever the law says. Of course, you might have to deal with the consequences.

Re:about civil disobedience

[Bearpaw]

I think an individual has the right to disobey to a law that he thinks it's not only useless, but also damaging to the community.

Arguably, an individual has a duty to disobey a bad law.

Unless I've missed it, nobody's meantioned Henry David Thoreau's classic essay, "Civil Disobedience" (originally "Resistance to Civil Government"). Worth reading.

Re:about civil disobedience

[blackwidowb]

I hope that the media will farily cover this situation

Unfortunately, this would be a huge problem, and about as likely as your pig flying.

How many computer-related items have the media covered fairly? E-mail worms become life threatening issues, and defacing of websites becomes terrorist activity. What headline is more likely, "Man Arrested for Playing DVD" or "Computer Professional Arrested for Violating DMCA"?

Something to think about....

Re:about civil disobedience

[tomstdenis]

well hell ya I disagree with paying off politicians but this "I know whats best for everyone" attitude is not good either.

The problem is those people get elected after all. I mean here in Canada virtually no English speaking person like Jean Chretien but he still keeps winning elections because stupid asses vote for him every four years!

What people should do is make [probably already do] a website of politicians who accept bribes/etc and when election time goes around make sure you don't vote for them.

Sure they may get a nice 100K bonus from some industry but when they lose their jobs they will have to think twice.

Tom

Is it really illegal?

[smiff]

I do not think Mr. Perens will be breaking the law. The law forbids trafficking in a circumvention device. Speech is not a device except when that 'speech' can function, such as with software (or so the court ruled in the DeCSS case). Simply telling someone how to circumvent region coding does not violate the DMCA, unless you 'tell' someone by providing software that can do it.

It is true that Felton was threatened with a law suit if he were to present non-functional speech on weaknesses in SDMI, but the RIAA would have gotten no where with a law suit, because Felton's speech would not function on its own.

Sklyarov was not arrested for speaking at DefCon. He was arrested because his company sold a copy of its DMCA violating software in the United States, and because he held the copyright on that software.

You can read section 1201 for yourselves. It says:

No person shall manufacture, import, offer to the public, provide, or otherwise traffic in any technology, product, service, device, component, or part thereof, that -

(A) is primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing protection afforded by a technological measure that effectively protects a right of a copyright owner under this title in a work or a portion thereof;

By the same token, you can publish specs on how to circumvent macrovision. You just can't traffic in the device itself.

I am not a lawyer. If you plan on taking my advice, talk to a lawyer first.

Re:Is it really illegal?

[Scutter]

No person shall manufacture, import, offer to the public, provide, or otherwise traffic in any technology, product, service, device, component, or part thereof, that -

Hmm...You might say he's offering to the public a technology or service... need I continue? The law is interpreted by the courts.

Re:Is it really illegal?

[shaldannon]

Bruce is a lawyer so I figure if he says he's violating the DMCA, he should know. Other than that....you might pay some attention to the fact that the MPAA seems to like to haul people into court who are only linking to information about "violating" the DMCA, let alone actually doing so, so that technical consideration doesn't matter anyway.

Re:Is it really illegal?

[Profane Motherfucker]

Good point. Because after all, no lawyers have ever been wrong about the law -- hence, Perens *must* be correct.

Re:Is it really illegal?

[Mop]

No person shall manufacture, import, offer to the public, provide, or otherwise traffic in any technology, product, service, device, component, or part thereof, that - (A) is primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing protection [...]

By the same token, you can publish specs on how to circumvent macrovision. You just can't traffic in the device itself.

Funny that you added emphasis on the fact that it can be either a device or a service (a technical speech from a consultant is certainly a service) or others things, and conclud that it only concerns devices.

Re:Is it really illegal?

[ShadowFlyP]

I'd say that holding a conference constitutes a service, especially when they are charging to attend.

Re:Is it really illegal?

[Anonymous Coward]

No person shall manufacture, import, offer to the public, provide, or otherwise traffic in any technology, product, service, device, component, or part thereof, that -

(A) is primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing protection afforded by a technological measure that effectively protects a right of a copyright owner under this title in a work or a portion thereof;

Does this mean that DeCSS (or any other violating code) could just be thrown somewhere inconspicuous in emacs or gcc or some program, so that it's just a little feature rather than being "primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing protection..."? In other words, the software would be primarily designed to word-process, or compile C code, or whatever, and would be legal, but would still be capable of decoding DVDs...

Re:Is it really illegal?

[rushiferu]

True, which is probably why he's chosen this particular path, to maximize publicity and to minimize any risk. If he's already got a legal defence planned out he should be able to side step any legal action taken against him since he's not actually distributing a circumvention device. Of course, he could be hedging his bets that he won't get arrested at all....

Re:Is it really illegal?

[Sloppy]

By the same token, you can publish specs on how to circumvent macrovision. You just can't traffic in the device itself.

That's what a normal person would think, but Kaplan ruled differently. When 2600 was not publishing or making the DeCSS code available, but instead merely was telling people about other computers where the code was available (hyperlinks to computers that were outside of 2600's control), Kaplan said that was trafficking. Your concept of trafficking is out-of-date if you haven't taken Kaplan's newspeak definition into account.

Re:Is it really illegal?

[djtack]

I wonder why people think the DMCA applies here at all. I thought it only applies to circumventing technological means preventing copying. Region encoding has nothing to do with copying, and is only in place to artificially segment the market.

Re:Is it really illegal?

[shaldannon]

I think if he was hedging his bets, he wouldn't be making a quote like "this is starting to become a tradition." It occurred to me after I wrote the parent post that perhaps Bruce is trying to come up with something just flagrant enough to bait the MPAA (or whoever) into hauling him into court so he can use whatever legal defense he's already planned out to shut down the DMCA. If so, I wish him much luck....

Re:Is it really illegal?

[Bruce Perens]

No, I am not a lawyer. I do know a lot of good ones.

Bruce

Re:Is it really illegal?

[pb]

Anonymous Stranger: Where do the druggies hang out?
Me: around the corner in the back alley.
Anonymous Stranger: Can they get me drugs?
Me: probably; they always seem to have drugs.
Anonymous Stranger: Drug trafficker! You're so busted!
Me: WTF??

Re:Is it really illegal?

[Rogerborg]

Read on.

* (g) Encryption Research. -

* (2) Permissible acts of encryption research. - Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (a)(1)(A), it is not a violation of that subsection for a person to circumvent a technological measure as applied to a copy, phonorecord, performance, or display of a published work in the course of an act of good faith encryption research if -
o (A) the person lawfully obtained the encrypted copy, phonorecord, performance, or display of the published work;
o (B) such act is necessary to conduct such encryption research;
o (C) the person made a good faith effort to obtain authorization before the circumvention; and (D) such act does not constitute infringement under this title or a violation of applicable law other than this section, including section 1030 of title 18 and those provisions of title 18 amended by the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act of 1986.

* (3) Factors in determining exemption. - In determining whether a person qualifies for the exemption under paragraph (2), the factors to be considered shall include -
o (A) whether the information derived from the encryption research was disseminated, and if so, whether it was disseminated in a manner reasonably calculated to advance the state of knowledge or development of encryption technology, versus whether it was disseminated in a manner that facilitates infringement under this title or a violation of applicable law other than this section, including a violation of privacy or breach of security;

Were we all following that? The preceeding sections of 1201 don't make it illegal to disseminate information on decrypting. However, (g)(3)(a) implies that it does. Very weakly, IMHO, and a reasonable judge should interpret this as saying that not disseminating information about your circumvention device is only one part of making that device allowed, not that the act of dissemination is itself illegal.

Unfortunately, because 2600 had an unreasonable judge and gave up their case, case law now disagrees, and we're boned until we prove otherwise.

Re:Is it really illegal?

[not_again]

It seems as if all Bruce has to do is say he is now supplying a Special Anti-DCMA inking service. Perhaps he will distribute marker pens after the talk. Only $10!

Re:Is it really illegal?

[Hugonz]

I do not think Mr. Perens will be breaking the law. The law forbids trafficking in a circumvention device. Speech is not a device except when that 'speech' can function, such as with software (or so the court ruled in the DeCSS case). Simply telling someone how to circumvent region coding does not violate the DMCA, unless you 'tell' someone by providing software that can do it.

Tell that to Skylarov and 2600.

Hugo

Re:Is it really illegal?

[markmoss]

There are people doing ten years in a federal penitentiary for merely taking a phone message for a drug dealer, so your scenario is not impossible... BTW, often the actual dealer is doing only five years - they give time off for "cooperating" by naming other dealers. The bigger the dealer, the more penny-ante dealers he knows (it ain't safe to turn in the big ones!) and the less time he actually serves. And as a bonus, maybe he'll get rid of some competition. Or maybe he'll just get those pesky neighbors that keep calling the cops on his crackhouse raided themselves...

Re:Is it really illegal?

[shaldannon]

I stand corrected.

Since you're on the thread, I'm curious why you're staging this... :}

Re:Is it really illegal?

[Anonymous Coward]

Best of luck!

I hope they're not needed

Re:Is it really illegal?

[Wolfier]

Let Me Say It Once And For All:

No person shall manufacture, import, offer to the public, provide, or otherwise traffic in any technology, product, service, device, component, or part thereof, that -

(A) is primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing protection afforded by a technological measure that effectively protects a right of a copyright owner under this title in a work or a portion thereof;

Does the defeat of REGION CODING circumvent the copyright protection? No. It only circumvents an internationally illegal business practice.

I'll say, break it away. Sites that distributes software like DVDGenie never got prosecuted under the DMCA. Why? Because they have a case: region coding is NOT copyright protection.

Gandhian resistance

[BigJim.fr]

Taken to a larger scale, this is a classic tactic : flooding the oppressor with so many cases that enforcement of the law becomes impossible, provoking the oppressor into stupid actions. Trivial technical violations are to be favored over full scale confrontation because gradual erosion of the oppression in a non-violent way minimizes the likely damage to the parties. In the case of the DMCA, the battlefield is in the livingroom of the average consumer : the banalization of DMCA violations by consumers defending their right will be the turning point of the struggle. Until that point, open daylight is where everyone should stand to fight : a few activists are easy to control, tens of thousands of normal postings from perfectly legitimate sites all over the network are not. Keep posting comrades !

Favourite quote

[forged]

• "This is becoming a tradition. I go there and break the law every year in the name of free speech."

For great justice !

DVD Region Absurdity

[Myco]

This whole matter of DVD region encoding becomes absurd when you really look at it. Hacking a DVD player to be multi-region is illegal, according to DMCA. But I can import a DVD player from another region, right (if not, why not)? Or build one from scratch, as another poster suggested? So let's say I've got one hacked DVD player, and one imported from the UK, and they'll both play the DVDs I bought in London. They're essentially the same piece of hardware (ignoring for the moment that the hacked player also plays DVDs from my native region -- I guess I could disable that or something), and yet one is illegal. Whose interests are served by that, and why should we consider them to be legitimate?

Re:DVD Region Absurdity

[Anonymous Coward]

Of course it's absurd. It's also quite likely illegal, too. It's only a matter of time before governments begin ruling that region encoding is nothing less than restraint of trade (price fixing). In fact, it is already happened--New Zealand has done just that.

I'm sorry to say that the U.S. will be the last place on the planet to do away with region encoding.

I don't like DVD, but it's the best we've got right now. The digital capacity it represents is far too important to computing as a whole to be controlled by artificial "limits" like region encoding and CSS.

I've personally taken a page from Jello Biafra who once said: "Don't hate the media...BECOME the media." The same is ever true of this whole DVD mess. We need to free this particular media for public use--not corporate control.

Re:DVD Region Absurdity

[xA40D]

But surely in converting the UK DVD player to run with the US mains supply you would be modifying your hardware in such a way as to allow you to bypass the DVD region encoding. And in the process earn a long holiday at the tax payer's expense.

I have to agree, it's an absurd law.

Re:DVD Region Absurdity

[EvilMagnus]

But surely in converting the UK DVD player to run with the US mains supply you would be modifying your hardware in such a way as to allow you to bypass the DVD region encoding.

Actually, virtually all electrical hardware in Europe will run quite happily on 110V AC (and likewise, virtually all US electrical hardware is happy on 220-240V AC). All that's different is the plug, and you can get 'travel converters' that'll do that for you. I've cross-Atlantic'ed TVs and DVD players...even kettles, but they're no good without a step-up transformer. ;-)

Re:DVD Region Absurdity

[gorilla]

Except that the DVD consortium would claim that it's a violation of the licensing to use a UK DVD player in the US.

Re:DVD Region Absurdity

[bigdavex]

Or build one from scratch, as another poster suggested?

The catch there is that you'll need technologies (e.g., CSS) that you'll need to license from the consortium to be legal.

Re:DVD Region Absurdity

[Pig Hogger]

This whole matter of DVD region encoding becomes absurd when you really look at it. Hacking a DVD player to be multi-region is illegal, according to DMCA.

Nowhere does the DMCA says thou shalt not play a british DVD in thy DVD player. The DVD-CCA says so in it's license, but the purchasers of multi-region DVDs certainly aren't bound by the license itself.

Civil disobedience and money

[Myco]

I'm all for civil disobedience. It's a very noble thing to be willing to go to jail (especially give the state of our overstuffed prisons) for your ideals.

But in this case, they're talking about a $500,000 fine. I'm not sure how something like that works out if you can't pay it -- whether they substitute jail time or what. But supposing this guy was fined, and paid it, is that really civil disobedience? Somehow writing the bad guys a check and saying "in your face, man!" lacks the punch of imprisonment.

Re:Civil disobedience and money

[Anonymous Coward]

Unless the check bounces. That's always good for a cheap laugh.

Re:Civil disobedience and money

[ThePilgrim]

In the UK if you fail to pay the fine, either because you can't or won't, you get halled up for comtempt of court and get jail time.

Re:Civil disobedience and money

[Zathrus]

But in this case, they're talking about a $500,000 fine.

The law reads "up to 5 years in prison and/or $500,000 fine" -- per violation.

And, again, you miss the point. The point is not to be convicted -- it's to go to court and have the DMCA overturned as a violation of constitutional rights. But you can't do that unless you violate the law in the first place, preferably as an act of civil disobediance.

The fine doesn't just happen you know -- Mr. Perens would still have to go to court and be found guilty by a jury of his peers.

Oh, and if you're fined and can't/won't pay the money? Contempt of court -- welcome to jail. (This is not debtor's prison -- a judge would not keep someone in jail indefinitely if they were unable to pay the fine. Instead some portion of your paycheck would get seized by the government to pay off the fine over time. But you'd still land in jail for a few days for contempt if you refused to pay and were able, or possibly if you made no attempt to come to terms with the government)

Re:Civil disobedience and money

[mcfiddish]

Somehow writing the bad guys a check and saying "in your face, man!" lacks the punch of imprisonment.

The best people to fight wealthy control freaks are wealthy activists. Consider ourselves lucky we have at least one.

Re:Civil disobedience and money

[markmoss]

The point is not to be convicted -- it's to go to court and have the DMCA overturned as a violation of constitutional rights. But you can't do that unless you violate the law in the first place

And if he is actually arrested and locked up for a significant time (like Skylarov, who was shuttled around for 3 weeks before he got a _chance_ to post bail), also to have a $5M civil rights countersuit against the prosecutor, on the grounds that anyone who passed the bar exam ought to have known better...

Re:Civil disobedience and money

[Anonymous Coward]

"The point is not to be convicted -- it's to go to court and have the DMCA overturned as a violation of constitutional rights"

This depends on if he is practicing civil disobedience or if he is trying to fight the law through our own legal system. Civil disobedience would mean that he would violate the law, then plead no contest to the charges, pay whatever penalty, and then as soon as he gets out do it again. And get other people to do it too. As many times as it takes to make the government say "hey we are persecuting our own people for this stupid law, and we need their votes so maybe we should stop"

Fighting it in court is a simple matter of money and resources. That's the more regular path but it looks like the government / ??AA's don't want to see the full extent of the law tested until they can slowly stretch it out with precedent.

Re:Civil disobedience and money

[Gleef]

Myco writes:

I'm all for civil disobedience. It's a very noble thing to be willing to go to jail (especially give the state of our overstuffed prisons) for your ideals.

But in this case, they're talking about a $500,000 fine. I'm not sure how something like that works out if you can't pay it -- whether they substitute jail time or what.

Generally they attempt to sieze whatever assets they can, and attempt to garnish a percentage of your wages until the debt is paid (or you die of old age). If you get in the way of the attempts to collect, then you can land in jail for contempt.

But supposing this guy was fined, and paid it, is that really civil disobedience?

No, it isn't. I would assume that Bruce intends to not pay the fine.

In general, helping to finance someone else's immoral acts is itself an immoral act. Paying such a fine would directly support the suppression of free expression associated with the DMCA.

Unfortunately, it's not that simple today. He can refuse to pay the fine, and he can try to obstruct the government's attempts to confiscate his assets (and in some cases the rest of us can help obstruct these attempts). The trouble is they often garnish wages.

Garnishment happens completely independant of him, the government would contact his employer (HP) directly, and most businesses don't want to deal with the legal issues of failing to comply with a lawful court order.

Unless he has some understanding with HP where they intend to be disobediant as well (unlikely but possible, the DMCA hurts HP greatly) then he is stuck in a quandry. HP wouldn't be paying the fine for him (and if he requests HP pay the fine for him, it's no longer civil disobediance), HP would be manipulating his earnings so as to force him to pay the fine.

If this happens, then he would have a moral beef with HP. They wouldn't be paying him the wages that he agreed to work for, and if he silently accepts that little injustice, he also accepts the moral wrong of financing the government's immoral act.

If this came to pass, I don't see any way out other than threatening to quit unless HP pays the agreed upon wage. If they refuse, quit. If they accept, then whether or not HP gives the government they money they demand is HP's moral/legal/fiscal quandry, it's not Bruce's any longer.

Re:Civil disobedience and money

[Bruce Perens]

I did not discuss this with anyone at HP. Most of my Free Software activism is done representing myself or SPI, and not HP.

Bruce

Re:Civil disobedience and money

[MrResistor]

So, how do you plan to deal with the Garnishment issue, should it come up?

Re:Civil disobedience and money

[Gleef]

Bruce Perins wrote:
I did not discuss this with anyone at HP. Most of my Free Software activism is done representing myself or SPI, and not HP.

Fair enough, and pretty much what I expected. HP is a public corporation beholden to its shareholders, and shareholders generally do not like their companies taking activist stances.

I would say chances are pretty good that no legal action will come from your demonstration, but if legal consequences happen, just wanted to make sure you and others were aware that it might become a fight on two fronts, the direct legal battle, and a battle with HP over wage garnishment, even though HP is uninvolved in the demonstration.

Since I have your ear, a small idea: If you want to make extra sure that the trafficking clause is triggered, you could sell the hacked VCR to a member of the audience.

Best of luck, and I admire your courage in this matter.

Re:Civil disobedience and money

[jafac]

I think it's grossly unfair that a lobbyist can buy a congressman, and get a law passed for less money than it costs to break it.

Nice stunt

[xidix]

Yeah, okay. It's a nice stunt. Like watching Evel Knievel jump over a flaming school bus. We all get to watch as the daredevil makes the jump and we are torn between hoping he makes it and hoping he goes barreling into the bus and gets burned alive. What a spectacle.

But what exactly does it accomplish?

I don't see Perens' stunt accomplishing anything except for boosting Perens' own notoriaty. All this does is create an image that "open source advocate == pirate." This is the political equivalent of a bunch of kids driving past the principal's house with their asses out the car window, honking the horn. It is entertaining in a juevenile sort of way, but it doesn't lower the price of pudding in the cafeteria.

If the Open Source community wants to gain respect from the powers that be, we need to stop acting like children. Check your "H4X0RS RULE!" t-shirt at the door.

Re:Nice stunt

[Salsaman]

Did you read the article ? He's going to be talking about (and demonstrating) playing DVD's he bought in the UK on a US DVD player.

It's a large stretch to cast him as a 'pirate' just for doing that. Challenging an unjust law is not 'childish' as you suggest. Do you consider those who threw tea into the Boston river 'childish' as well ?

Re:Nice stunt

[wallsaroundme]

""All this does is create an image that "open source advocate == pirate."" I was thinking that it would have the opposite effect. When your average Joe hears that someone is violating copyright law they think of "evil software pirates from Vietnam", not of someone wanting to exersise fair use. "we need to stop acting like children" and let this stuff go on, you are correct, activism is only for the childish and for those whose don't wish to be taken seriously. Hell, why do we even have those children on our money anyway?

Re:Nice stunt

[Hieronymus Howard]

How is playing your own, legally purchased, DVDs 'piracy'?

HH
--

Re:Nice stunt

[altgrr]

I don't see Perens' stunt accomplishing anything except for boosting Perens' own notoriaty. All this does is create an image that "open source advocate == pirate." This is the political equivalent of a bunch of kids driving past the principal's house with their asses out the car window, honking the horn. It is entertaining in a juevenile sort of way, but it doesn't lower the price of pudding in the cafeteria

Perens has a point. He is not showing that OSS advocates are pirates. There is no reason why someone who buys a DVD from overseas should not be able to play it in their DVD player at home. The media attempted to exert control on buyers by limiting what area of the world they could buy their DVDs from, but of course there are many ways to circumvent this, and region-free players are widely available in the UK. This is how it should be.

To my knowledge, a number of DVD players can be made region-free by entering codes with the remote control - although this is never publicised by the manufacturers, because it'd land them in trouble: they'd be the ones breaking the law, not the end users.

Ultimately, what is being pointed out here is that the DMCA achieves nothing of any positive purpose. Manufacturers, it has been shown, are not in favour of such limitations (DVD player manufacturers; Philips in the case of protected CDs) - and rightly so.

Time for the American media industry to stop feeling all self-important, and realise that, if it wants to remain successful, it should stop behaving in such a childish manner, and start facing up to the fact that if it makes its products inaccessible to the world, the world won't be buying much of it.

Re:Nice stunt

[fyonn]

Do you consider those who threw tea into the Boston river 'childish' as well ?

well, us brits did ;)

you know, many people think that britain doesn't celebrate thanksgiving. of course it does. it's just that our thanksiving is on the 4th of july...

hohoho

well, I thought it was funny..

dave

Re:Nice stunt

[matastas]

What, precisely, does the OSS community have to gain if they 'stop acting like children?' Play by the rules and, say, be ignored at a Deparment of Commerce meeting?

This is standard civil disobdience, and probably necessary in light of the obstacles set up by the status quo. I'm hardly a Marxist, but kudos to a guy hanging them out in favor of a cause he values. Jail/fines are jail/fines, regardless of the prison.

The point is to get people to pay attention, and possibly win a court chaloenge or two. Granted, the community could use some maturity and some social leadership, but sometimes, you have to do something as absurd as not giving up your seat on the bus to make your point.

Re:Nice stunt

[Graspee_Leemoor]

I note that the article makes it sound like he expected to be able to play the DVDs from the UK when he got back home and was unpleasantly suprised, which is almost certainly not the case.

graspee

Re:Nice stunt

[xidix]

First off, I didn't cast Perens as a pirate, but I think that is how the mainstream media will cast him, and I don't think that helps the cause he is trying to bolster.

Also, there is the issue of accountability. Perens is standing up as a champion of freedom, but he can afford to do it, can't he? He's got HP behind him to pay the bill (because you know that he wouldn't be doing this without HP's approval). If he was just Joe User making $50k per year with two kids and a wife to support, and he did this, I'd say "there's a guy with conviction" because he has something to lose. But Perens has nothing to lose, and everything to gain. This is really just a publicity stunt, and I think it serves no other purpose than to serve Perens' ego, and HP's image.

As to the Boston Tea Party, you're comparing apples to grapes. The Boston Tea Party took place in December of 1773 and was a largely symbolic jesture against the East India Company and the British government. It didn't spark a revolution, it was a symptom of an occuring revolution, namely the colonial tea boycott of 1773. The Boston Tea Party was an act of terrorism against the East India Company, whose agents in Boston refused to be extorted into resignation like their fellows in other shipping ports had been.

Perens' little anti-DMCA stunt is like the Tea Party without the boycott. Instead of staging media events, efforts should be made to convice concerned citizens that they should stop patronizing the media companies that are restricting their rights.

Of course, it's a lot easier to stage a $500,000 media event (which is dirt cheap by industry standards) than to convice people to simply stop buying DVDs and do something more productive with their time than sitting in front of a television.

Re:Nice stunt

[Pig Hogger]

To my knowledge, a number of DVD players can be made region-free by entering codes with the remote control - although this is never publicised by the manufacturers, because it'd land them in trouble: they'd be the ones breaking the law, not the end users

There is no law, anywhere in the world (including the US), which states that multi-region DVD players are illegal.

However, there is a DVD-CCA LICENSE which says so. But that is only a civil matter between the DVD-CCA and the licensees.

Re:Nice stunt

[Anonymous Coward]

Make him walk the plank. ARR matey!

Re:Nice stunt

[Anonymous Coward]

People like you make me sick. What would this country be like if our forefathers just bent over and paid the tea tax.

Re:Nice stunt

[a_n_d_e_r_s]

Because the DMCS says so.

Re:Nice stunt

[xidix]

People like you make me sick. What would this country be like if our forefathers just bent over and paid the tea tax.

Well, actually, the tea issue of 1773 and the Boston Tea Party that occured in December of 1773 wasn't about citizens paying a tea tax. It was about a single company (the East India Company) NOT having to pay tax on tea sales, and colonial merchants who didn't think that was fair. You see, the EIC could undercut any of the colonial merchants and sell tea cheaper than anyone else. So actually, the tea issue of 1773 was not about colonial consumers paying more for tea, but paying less for tea and buying it from an English company rather than a colonial merchant.

It should be noted as well that the people who were bent out of shape over the situation were the colonial merchants, NOT the average consumers. The merchants are the ones who stirred public interest in the issue and proposed the tea boycott of 1773. This is a classical example of politics manipulated by big business. In fact, some of the tactics employed by the tea merchants were almost mafia-like in the way they threatened and coerced employees and agents of the EIC, forcing the resignation of many EIC port agents through violence and intimidation in an effort to close the ports to EIC traffic.

This could probably be classified as the first "Buy American" campaign. Of course, the loudest proponents of "Buy American" today are American companies who are quietly moving their operations south of the border.

People like YOU make ME sick. Why don't you learn some actual history rather than simply regurgitating American mythology?

Re:Nice stunt

[Anonymous Coward]

Neither of you make me sick.

This is a classical example of politics manipulated by big business.

Agreed. However, the big business manipulating politics was the East India Company. The Company was important to Britain politically, as it "was the instrument of British government in India"* and also counted many important Englishmen as stockholders.

Calling colonial tea merchants "big business" in comparison to the EIC is a bit far-fetched

[T]he tea issue of 1773 and the Boston Tea Party that occured in December of 1773 wasn't about citizens paying a tea tax. It was about a single company (the East India Company) NOT having to pay tax on tea sales...

Actually, the EIC continued to have to pay Townshend duties on the tea they sold. Other changes introduced by the Tea Act (such as [1] allowing the EIC to ship directly to the American market rather than shipping it first to Britain and thereby [2] avoiding paying duties in England) allowed the Company to charge less than Dutch and American smugglers. The British government saw this as the thin edge of the wedge that would get the King's American subjects used to paying these Townshend duties, which they were protesting at the time.

However, my impression is that it is generally accepted that the agitators who perpetrated Tea Parties did so because they were concerned that the British plan might work; that their neighbors would, in fact, buy the cheaper tea even though it meant paying the Townshend duties.

Please note, however, that I am not a historian.

*A History of the American Revolution, John R. Alden, 1969

USA! USA! USA!

[cybercuzco]

Bruce Perens is my new hero, and the embodiment of the true american spirit. What most americans dont realize is that if they are subject to laws that they feel are unjust or unfair, it is their DUTY to disobey them. Now of course, they also must pay the consequences of that disobedience, but enough people protesting and disobeying unjust and unfair laws and those laws get overturned. Slavery, womens right to vote, civil rights, etc all involved people standing up and fighting for what they believed in, and I wish more people did that with respect to the DMCA.

Re:USA! USA! USA!

[Anonymous Coward]

Did women illegally voted in order to gain the right to vote?

Re:USA! USA! USA!

[Anonymous Coward]

What most americans dont realize is that if they are subject to laws that they feel are unjust or unfair, it is their DUTY to disobey them.

And what most geeks don't realize is that most Americans don't see eye-to-eye with them on these issues. Here's a little newsflash for you - when most Americans buy DVDs from Wal-Mart, Best Buy, Circuit City, etc., they just work. They don't have to worry about region encoding or macrovision or any of that other "teknickel" stuff. They just put it in the machine and fire it up. So what do they have to stand up for? What is there to be angry about? Their shit works properly. Why do they care that some film geek who can't play his Hong Kong action flicks? Believe me, the American public can still get angry about issues for which they have strong feelings. This just isn't one of them.

Re:USA! USA! USA!

[cybercuzco]

no, they just marched in the streets and got arrested for being "Unladylike"

Re:USA! USA! USA!

[Anonymous Coward]

>>What most americans dont realize is that if they are subject to laws that they feel are unjust or unfair, it is their DUTY to disobey them

I'm not saying Americans are dumb. They're not. But I seriously doubt the average American knows how disgusting the DMCA is. The only Americans I know that are savvy on this issue read Slashdot. So let's stop preaching to the choir and go out to the populace.

Re:USA! USA! USA!

[Anonymous Coward]

The only Americans I know that are savvy on this issue read Slashdot.

Its worse than we feared.

Re:USA! USA! USA!

[xidix]

Exactly. They assembled and made their voices heard. They didn't go to the polls and try to cast a ballot. That would have been ineffective and nothing but a useless gesture. Instead they gathered support for their platform, and exercised the political power of mass dissention.

Bruce Perens is making a useless gesture that will accomplish nothing. If he truly wanted to change the law, he would campaign to the masses to stop buying DVDs from companies that use regional encoding. Cut off their funding, and you cut off the political power of the RIAA and the MPAA.

Here's the problem: nobody would do it. Why? Because America is the land of the fat and lazy. What would we do if we didn't have movies to watch and music to listen to? What would we do to entertain ourselves? You know why people aren't marching in the street over the DMCA? Because they can't peel their fat asses away from their computers for a few hours to go participate in a rally.

It's much easier to bitch and moan on Slashdot, because after all, all the politicians read Slashdot, right?

And before anyone asks, I'm not excluding myself here. I'm just as fat and lazy as the rest of you. And I'm disgusted with myself.

Thanks Bruce! Most people just don't get it.

[Anonymous Coward]

Thanks Bruce, this needed to be done to point out the lunacy, unfairness, and restrictions on our freedom created by the DMCA. Also it helps considerably that this public display/message is being made by an open source luminary such as yourself.
The problem as I see it is that most people just don't "get it", I think you have something planned that will help them to "get it".
Thanks again,
Chip

Is this the fastest way to change a law in the US?

[NKJensen]

Does it always take a courageous guy to change the law in the US?

I'm not familiar with the law system of the US.

Which procedure is the "intended" way to change a law?

umm... that's quite simple

[Ender Ryan]

Quite simply, the DMCA is something that your average Joe six-pack(mmm... beer, serious, I love beer) doesn't care, or for that matter even understand. Because Joe is stupid? No, because Joe doesn't work in the computer industry.

So, civil disobedience simply will not work, because Joe will only hear that a bunch of hackers were arrested for stealing stuff.

And with nearly 1% of the U.S. population being prison inmates, a couple thousand computer geeks won't make a goddam bit of difference.

Re:umm... that's quite simple

[Pooh22]

I think you don't understand the principle of an act of civil disobedience in this manner...

See this comment: by Zathrus? which explains it very well.

There's also another comment by Bolke which also gives a hint about how this is commonly done in the Netherlands to overrule or straighten out laws using the justice system.

Re:umm... that's quite simple

[ThePilgrim]

It will make a hell of a diffrence when those 2000 geeks don't turn up for work tomorrow

Re:umm... that's quite simple

[dillon_rinker]

Yup...all those foreign-controlled pirated terrorist Linux computers will be replaced by good-old all-American Microsoft systems, and 6000 techs will be hired to run them. So arresting geeks who care about DMCA would be good for national security AND the economy.

Re:umm... that's quite simple

[crawling_chaos]

Nahhh... They'll just hire some of the thousands of geeks that have been laid off by companies like WorldCom and Global Crossing. Never believe that you are irreplaceable. That's the first step to getting put on the layoff list. I speak from personal experience.

Re:umm... that's quite simple

[warpSpeed]

RANT
Another problem here is that the american educational system in general does not turn out critical thinkers. Lets hear it for the standardized test (props to Bush!) Kids are being force fed rote knowlege under the guise of being education. Then they are tested for said knowlege and the system is declared to be broken. The cure, more tests...

The result is a mass of Joe six packs that do not even know when "the man" is taking away rights from the average citizen...

The real crime is the apathy that results from a poor educational system.
/RANT

Oh here are my meds....whew... i feel better now.

Re:umm... that's quite simple

[will_die]

Actually if the kids could give back some of that force fed rote knowlege some of the problem would be solved. The problem is even when force feed the information they still cannot pass the tests.

Re:umm... that's quite simple

[ThePilgrim]

At which point Al Q'ieda unleashes Code Red version 2 :-)

Re:umm... that's quite simple

[MAXOMENOS]

It will make a hell of a diffrence when those 2000 geeks don't turn up for work tomorrow

Indeed it will: 2000 formerly unemployed geeks will have jobs the next day, at half the wages that the 2000 detained, formerly employed geeks, were paid. Gotta love this economy.

Re:umm... that's quite simple

[duck_prime]

RANT

Another problem here is that the american educational system in general does not turn out critical thinkers. Lets hear it for the standardized test (props to Bush!) Kids are being force fed rote knowlege under the guise of being education. Then they are tested for said knowlege and the system is declared to be broken. The cure, more tests...

Gee, I know, let's remove standardized testing so we won't even know whether the system is broken or not? Why are people so damn scared of standardized testing? Are you afraid to find out that children in Finland, Uganda, and Japan know more math than you? For fucking shame! I say, more standardized testing!

Re:umm... that's quite simple

[warpSpeed]

I have no problem with testing in general, nor comparing out kids with the rest of the world (we are way behind in some respects, so it is good to point it out). But when test are used as a political tool to flog the other political party, and show how "tough on education" you can be, there is going to be many more problems created then fixed.

I have a problem with a generic catch all test that are just multiple guess of rote knowledge. Since the educational instituions are graded (if you will) based on test performance, they skew the class room work towards the test while sacrificing other important skills.

It is much harder to teach problem solving skills and critical thinking. Since you cannot measure it it will naturaly fall by the wayside in this enviroment.

Gee, I know, let's remove standardized testing so we won't even know whether the system is broken or not?

We do know that the system is broken. When a high school graduates enter college and have to take several remedail(SP?) reading and math courses, there is a fundamental problem. If the tests are used to intercept these students and help them early on, they have served a good purpose. However, if the tests are used to politicaly flog the local, and state boards of education for under performance, then they are a pervers undertaking.

The schools will be mandated to perform well on the tests. If the pressure is high enough all energies will be directed at preparing for the tests, cutting out time for other important skills.

It isn't illegal

[Anonymous Coward]

Why in the hell is it illegal to modify property that you already own?

According to judge Kaplan, as long as you only do it to exercise your fair-use rights, it is okay. It only becomes illegal when you distribute the device, or provide a circumvention service for other people. The law was intended so that only those with the know-how and resource can circumvent the system. I'm not making this up. That's really what he said.

More then just technology

[famazza]

DMCA is not a specific case, it's just a case that is very visible to us (nerds, geeks, techies, whatever).

The problem here is not about a single law, but it is about a whole system that is showing signs of unrealibility, the so called Democracy.

"From the people, by the people, to the people". DMCA is the proof that the organization that we call Democratic Government and the Representative System is not representing the people, but interests to big corporations.

We need to stop right now this kind of attitude! Our elected representatives are not representing our interests, lobbyists are convincing them to represent their interests. What about the people?

Of course that a healthy economy and low interest rates keeps people satisfied, but this is bread and circus, they keep people working and consuming and keep us happy.

Maybe we should review our concept of freedom, and mainly our concept of democratic government.

Re:More then just technology

[EchoMirage]

Maybe we should review our concept of freedom, and mainly our concept of democratic government.

There's little basis to your charged emotional diatribe, beyond rehashing the accepted opinion of the Slashdot masses.

You think democracy isn't working? Try the alternatives and find out how well this republic democracy actually functions, despite its many shortcomings.

The fact that Bruce can challenge this law, and is in fact entitled every good right and method by which to do so, in and of itself speaks volumes for "freedom" and "democracy," which you foolishly throw out with the bathwater.

You're absolutely right that lobbyists for special interests have the biggest political stake in our government. And you absolutely correct. But it's been that way from day one. The nature of the American representative democractic system allows the outspoken few to have a louder voice. But there are also many protections, checks, and balances to prevent the "tyranny of the majority" that was feared in this nation's waking days. Just because one group has a bigger say initially doesn't mean that they'll still make it through the court system, or past the executive branch, etc.

What you seem to be after is a direct form of democracy, without the addition of representation. That's fine. Your homework assignment for today is to try and find a country anywhere in history that has strictly held to that system and gotten anything accomplished. Come back and let us know what you find.

Winston Churchill said that democracy is the worst system, except for the alternatives. Your little diatribe is very charged and passionate, but ultimately it is vacuous. I recommend retaking Political Science 101.

Re:More then just technology

[Brian_Ellenberger]

>Maybe we should review our concept of freedom, >and mainly our concept of democratic government.

Everytime any civilization has gone down that road of "reviewing democratic government" it ends up turning into a dictatorship. Democracy is messy and ugly. There is alot of politics and interests mucking everything up and bending the system to their beliefs. And sometimes democracy goes against what you think is right.

I hate to tell you this but that is the way it is *supposed* to work. It is supposed to be messy! Yea, it would be alot easier if we had a dictator that always made the right choices, but that is never what dictators turn out to be like.

So the majority of the people could care less about the DMCA or whether DVDs have regions. So what. Boo hoo. You didn't get your way. Most people are geeks and care alot more about crime/poverty/education and everything else that actually means something. Not being able to view London DVDs on their home player does not appear on the top of anyone's "Biggest Problems" list.

So what would you do? Throw elected government away? Or maybe stop the "evil lobbyists"? But what about the First Amendment? Or "campaign finance reform"? Oh, then there is that First Amendment again. Nothing like putting a gag order on the ACLU or NAACP a month before the election or limiting the amount of emails an organzation sends out to 500 (yes, both in our newly passed reform act).

Anyway I'm rambling. Point being, democracy is the best we can do right now.

Brian Ellenberger

Re:More then just technology

[Art Tatum]

Uhh, this isn't a Democracy and never has been. It used to be a decent Republic, however.

And we don't really want our representatives to listen to "us" becuase "us" is ignorant. Seriously, do you want the majority of people in this country to be responsible for our next technology disaster, errr, law? Our representatives are doing badly enough on their own. They don't need a bunch of ignorant constituents helping out.

And no, I'm not being elitist. I'm sure there are farmers all over this country sickened at the idea that representatives might be taking the advice of a bunch of computer geeks about laws governing agricultural business.

Re:More then just technology

[sielwolf]

The problem here is not about a single law, but it is about a whole system that is showing signs of unrealibility, the so called Democracy.

Actually I thought civil disobedience (and this example) shows the strength of Democracy.

The problem is that, no matter how much bureaucracy you make, it is still possible to get an unjust law passed. So trying to improve the system won't work.

The key is that Democracy allows for grass-roots reevaluation of legal precedent (through intentional civil disobedience or unintentionally [Scopes Monkey Trial]).

How many important US laws have been passed due to activism? Women's sufferage, Civil Liberties Act, etc etc.

Demonstrations are the most legally protected and peaceful. Civil Disobedience comes right after it.

The problem is when you decide that the system is beyond repair and so you take to illegal action with little interest in federal procedure. If Perens was just going to hand out a thousand Region-free copies of the Matrix or if he was going to assassinate the President, then he would only be breaking the law for his own self-interest. He isn't and that's why I wish him the best of luck.

Re:More then just technology

[tweek]

You loose already. The US is NOT a democracy. It's a republic. Learn the difference and you can come back and play with the big kids.

Re:More then just technology

[Anonymous Coward]

Why do so many people think "democracy" and "republic" are mutually exclusive?

Your implementation of a republic may not be democratic, but that's your problem not the fault of the philosophy of republicanism.

Re:More then just technology

[fungai]

DMCA is the proof that the organization that we call Democratic Government and the Representative System is not representing the people, but interests to big corporations.


I don't understand how you can say this. In the end the American individuals are still the ones who vote people into office or not. If they vote for assholes because they're impressed by their heavily sponsored, glitzy campaigns who's fault is that?

Re:More then just technology

[Anonymous Coward]

The US is both a democracy and a republic.

Re:More then just technology

[pmz]

Before you conclude that the Representative Democracy of the U.S. is at fault, also consider that the U.S. is far from the same country it was even twenty years ago.

One thing I wonder about is whether the overall exponential growth of successful economies, such as the U.S., would overwhelm any government system. The same number of decision-makers in government have to deal with an ever increasing barrage of issues, concerning technology, population growth, increased expectations for standards of living, etc. How long until they just can't keep up? Remember, the difficulty in managing a complex system does not increase linearly with the growth of the system--it increases exponentially (so, the government's responsibility may be increasing doubly exponentially; try keeping up with that!).

Anyway, please consider a wider range of causes before making a simple dismissal of Republican system.

Re:More then just technology

[be-fan]

What about the people?
>>>
The people stopped caring a long time ago. You really can't blame the congress people. When the turnout rates for congressional elections hover around 36% why SHOULD they care what the public wants? It's strange. I'd like to have more faith in the public than this. Honestly, not everyone out there is like the cattle-brained "average american" stereotype. Most people are entirely decent and reasonably intelligent. Perhaps its just the prevalent lifestyle, which consists mainly of working, eating, and sleeping, which gives people that extremely narrow outlook on life. One key difference, though, I think that makes it seem like the U.S. is worse off than other countries with respect to its population's intelligence is its media. We have this history of glorifying the common person, and this is reflected in our media. Other cultures tend to glorify the exemplery members of their societies instead, which gives people the impression that the society is smarter as a whole.

Re:More then just technology

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, it isn't true that Americans vote everyone into office. I agree that in most cases it is, but it's not in the case of presidential elections.

In many states, the electorate has no obligation to vote with its constituency. Of course, they probably wouldn't be voted in again, but that's a bit of a late check in my opinion.

Also, most states vote all of their electorial votes as a lump, which ignores the votes of some portion of their citizens. Thus, if 49% of a given state voted for candidate A while 51% voted for candidate B, leading to the electorate coming out, say 7 to 6 in favor of B, all 13 electorial votes would be cast for B, ignoring just under half the population.

If you haven't realized yet, this is why Bush won the last election...

Re:More then just technology

[Pig Hogger]

The US is NOT a democracy. It's a republic.

The USA is both. " Democracy " and " Republic " are not opposites.

Democracy:

1. government by the people; a form of government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them or by their elected agents under a free electoral system.
2. a state having such a form of government: The United States of America and Canada are democracies.
3. a state of society characterized by formal equality of rights and privileges.
4. political or social equality; democratic spirit.
5. the common people of a community as distinguished from any privileged class; the common people with respect to their political power.

Republic:

1. a state in which the supreme power rests in the body of citizens entitled to vote and is exercised by representatives chosen directly or indirectly by them.
2. any body of persons viewed as a commonwealth.
3. a state in which the head of government is not a monarch or other hereditary head of state.
4. (cap.) any of the five periods of republican government in France. Cf. First Republic, Second Republic, Third Republic, Fourth Republic, Fifth Republic.
5. (cap., italics.) a philosophical dialogue (4th centuryb.c.) by Plato dealing with the composition and structure of the ideal state.

You can have undemocratic republics as well as democratic ones (Irak, Iran, Lybia, Koreas, China, Cuba); likewise, democracies don't have to be republics either (Belgium, Netherlands, Britain, Sweden)

Re:More then just technology

[Gaccm]

i don't know if you care, but the scopes trial was as uninteltional as Rosa Parks sitting in the white section. The ACLU had planned for a long time, trying to find the perfect person to use to break the law (side bit of info: Rosa Parks wasn't initially planned to be the person, however the first person got pregnant). When the trial did happen, both sides were ready to send the best lawyers they had,

Re:More then just technology

[tweek]

good point on the definitions. A few notes back though:

The CIA does not consider the US a democracy NOR a democratic republic. this , we are in fact a federal republic.

Democracy is actually a system of mob rule. This was one thing that even James Madison decried in the Federalist Papers.

I will say this, however, that lately the US is becoming more and more of a democracy when special interest groups with the most money (the biggest mob) bend the ears of the politicians.

You see, in a democracy, the rights of the individual are superceded by the rights of the larger group (the mob). What happens when the mob is made up of luddites? Computers and coffee machines become illegal and we are all out of work. In a republic, my right to work and make a living supercedes your personal beliefs on technology as long as it doesn't infringe on your right to hold that belief.

I know that's a bad example but it's the best that I could come up ATM. A democracy is a terribly unstable beast. The whims of the people are more fickle than the winds of the four corners.

I've attached some links at the bottom. Some of these come from religious websites but it makes a valid point none the less. Note that I don't endorse any of the religous links posted. I could care less. Thomas Jefferson said once (paraphrase) "If a man believes in god or does not, what does it matter to me? It neither picks my pocket or breaks my leg." Another of the links is to the Cato Institute (disclaimer: an organization which I wholly support)

Some Links:
1
2
3
4

Re:More then just technology

[SubtleNuance]

Could any Swede please comment on the way you govern yourself -- i understand you have a broad and vibrant democracy that most participate in.

Re:More then just technology

[sielwolf]

Wait, are you telling me Inherit the Wind lied to me? The next thing you'll tell me is that everything isn't full of gasoline or there is no way to h4x0r the Gibson. Last time I use movies to learn anything!

BTW, thanks for the info.

Re:More then just technology

[Anonymous Coward]

So as long as there isn't a better alternative, we shouldn't try to fix what's broken in the current system?

The fact that Bruce is willing to break a law in no way demonstrates any government-granted freedom.

And I can tell from your naive belief in "checks and ballances" that you never read through the transcript of the DeCSS case. Judge Kaplan basically said, congress passed the law and it is not my place to question it.

Without complaints, nothing would ever get fixed.

Re:More then just technology

[deblau]

Actually, the thought of having a Democracy in this country scares the hell out of me, because most people are idiots. I'm all in favor of our current Republic.

Re:More then just technology

[EverDense]

There's little basis to your charged emotional diatribe, beyond rehashing the accepted opinion of the Slashdot masses.

You think democracy isn't working?

No! he thinks the United States "democracy" isn't working.

Your little diatribe sounds very authorative, but its foundations are built on quicksand.

Re:More then just technology

[hacker]

DMCA is not a specific case, it's just a case that is very visible to us (nerds, geeks, techies, whatever).

The DMCA is not a "case", it's a LAW. Big difference. It's already been decided and put on the books, and people are being found guilty of breaking it, and are being punished for it.

It may be unjust, but it IS a law, and it is on the books.

Re:More then just technology

[the_olo]

...If Perens was just going to hand out a thousand Region-free copies of the Matrix or if he was going to assassinate the President...

Hand out a thousand Region-free copies of the Matrix? My God, doesn't this person have any morals?

It's a tad bit different

[bsDaemon]

This isn't vietnam or basic civil rights. Not everyone understands what's wrong with this. They understand not wanting to go to war and die. They understand not wanting to get beaten up buy guys in bed sheets.

As long as it works for people, they don't care. How many americans do you think go to another country to purchase a DVD? How many people(again, mostly americans) know there are other operating systems out there not from Microsoft or Apple? Perportionaly, probably very few. It's going to take something incredibly obvious, such as someone getting busted for selling perminant markers which could be used to block out the first track of a copy protected CD. Then people will understand

Re:It's a tad bit different

[Lozzer]

Heck, how many Americans go to another country full stop? I heard one completely unreliable source say it was only 10%

Re:It's a tad bit different

[demaria]

Well, a lot of Americans go to Canada and the Caribbean areas. And the US is big and diverse enough that a New Yorker visiting CA or Texas is put into a very different culture. But if you're referring to going off-continent, that's a bit pricy since you must fly in addition to other expenses.

Re:It's a tad bit different

[pete-classic]

Well, we have the better part of a full size continent. Most Europeans can take day or weekend trips to foreign countries. Few Americans can, and those who can only have the options of Canada (more of the same) or Mexico (and the accessible parts are only really of interest to college kids).

For example I live in Colorado. It is a day and a half each way to each of Mexico and Canada, neither of which is very appealing to me.

We also don't have the kind of mass transit infrastructure that Europe has. I can't reasonably hop a train to Mexico.

A more equitable comparison would be "How many Americans have been to a 'foreign' state." I don't know any who haven't.

-Peter

Re:It's a tad bit different

[walt-sjc]

Free speech isn't a basic civil right???? I think most americans WILL understand that someone got arrested for TALKING about a subject that the government says you can't talk about. Frankly, you tan TALK about how to build a bomb, but not how to play a DVD. Most American's can understand the insanity of this, no matter how stupid.

Re:It's a tad bit different

[quax]

Sorry, but have you ever left the US for more than two days? CA and NY are still very much the same country. To live through the uterly confusing experience of total culture shock I highly recommend living in a country with another language.

Re:It's a tad bit different

[demaria]

It's still a different culture. It's not mind-numbingly different, but it's still different. Granted, it's not the same as being dropped in the middle of the African continet with the tribe that speaks in tounge clicking. I've spent a week in Italy, and it wasn't any more jarring than a week in Las Vegas.

Wasn't Code Ruled Free Speech?

[TibbonZero]

Wasn't code ruled free speech a while back though? So just explaining the code... wouldn't that be ok? I really don't see how a court can make explaining something can be illegal. He isn't screaming FIRE in a crowd.

What if someone makes something, can they explain it then? What about if they paint the code? Or sing it? Is that ok? Could he sing his whole presentation? Rappers can sing about shooting people and dealing drugs, which are illegal, but a person can't explain a technology?

Sometimes I hate this country and just want to live on a small island in the middle of nowhere....

Re:Wasn't Code Ruled Free Speech?

[skotte]

ok, but here's the thing. fFree speech or not, fFor some reason, software fFalls under a different set of guidelines. talking about murder in public is okay. demonstrating how to rape women is legal. probably wont win you any fFriends, but it's legal. (then again, it's done wonders fFor eminem's social circle)

but talk about software piracy in public or private? yer going to the klink, buddy!

Re:Wasn't Code Ruled Free Speech?

[tarmo]

Well, free speech or not, the DMCA prohibits all devices (be it hardware or software) and services whose main purpose is the circumvention of access and/or copy restrictions (DRMs).

So unfortunately, the DMCA limits free speech. You can't give a presentation on how to make a DVD player zone free, or how to make truetype fonts embedded, or how to turn ebooks into PDF. Because the lawyers prosecuting you can label whatever you do as a "service".

OK, so what if you do it for free? Free services are services also. Mainly you need to watch what you discuss, not how you do it.

This is the real problem of the DMCA - it isn't enough that killing another human is illegal; we also prohibit knife sharpeners. What did we just accomplish? Killing a human is just as illegal as it was without this new law, but now nearly every household is also engaging in criminal activities when they use their knife sharpeners. And what is the point? Is it easier to catch the killers with this new law? What? What? What?!

--
Tarmo

Re:Wasn't Code Ruled Free Speech?

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh fFor fFuck's sake. This fFellow again.

How in the world are you posting at +2?

Re:Wasn't Code Ruled Free Speech?

[guibaby]

This may be the best analogy for the situation that I have heard yet.

Re:Wasn't Code Ruled Free Speech?

[Dalcius]

I agree.

Assuming that coping CDs is A Bad Idea (e.g. assume the DMCA is right... heh):

Don't blame stupid ideas for the stupid people that act on them.

Don't stop someone from preaching a bad idea (Read: KKK, Bruce) -- that's a violation of free speech. Arresting people who do Bad Things is the proper course of action.

Re:Wasn't Code Ruled Free Speech?

[walt-sjc]

Perens is not advocating software piracy. Read the article. He plans to explain how to mod a DVD player to play legally purchased DVD's from other regions.

The current hollywood restriction that requires region coding is highly questionable. The legality of restricting your ability to play a purchased disc in a player from another region is questionable (I don't think it has ever been challenged in court.) The only thing I believe restricting this in the US is the DMCA.

Re:Wasn't Code Ruled Free Speech?

[captain_craptacular]

It seems to me that The legality of restricting your ability to play a purchased disc in a player isn't really questionable. If I make a DVD player I can design it to not play a single DVD if I so choose. I can make a painted carboard shell that looks like a DVD player and sell it to you. As long as I don't misrepresent it, it's perfectly legal. Technically to market a DVD player there just has to be a DVD out there somewhere that it will play. Then I can say it works with DVD's.

Don't get me wrong, I'm no DMCA or region coding supporter. I'm just saying that not everything you don't like is legally questionable.

Re:Wasn't Code Ruled Free Speech?

[certron]

" Wasn't code ruled free speech a while back though? So just explaining the code... wouldn't that be ok? I really don't see how a court can make explaining something can be illegal."

" What if someone makes something, can they explain it then? What about if they paint the code? Or sing it? Is that ok? Could he sing his whole presentation?"

Sort of gives a new, strange meaning to 'write-only code.' Actually, that's really kinda scary. Sort of like writing letters to someone and then having to put them in a fire. (Reminded of the Memory Hole in 1984...)

Something I've realized, there are only people in this world. Person against person, or in groups. If enough people get together, this law and others like it *can* be changed. Get to it.

Re:Wasn't Code Ruled Free Speech?

[lecter,hannibal_md]

free speech is allowed, as long as it doesnt directly threaten our lovely government... and since big business is pretty much government, and this threatens them... were screwed.

Re:Wasn't Code Ruled Free Speech?

[CorwinOfAmber]

If I make a DVD player I can design it to not play a single DVD if I so choose. I can make a painted carboard shell that looks like a DVD player and sell it to you. As long as I don't misrepresent it, it's perfectly legal.

Nobody is claiming otherwise. Of course it's legal for you to sell me a cardboard shell that looks like a DVD player. But if I add circuitry to it so that it does in fact play DVDs, and then you try to claim it's illegal for me to do that, then your analogy becomes more accurate.

It's not the making or selling of the region-encoded DVD players that I object to, it's the fact that Hollywood, Fritz, et al say it's illegal for me to modify my own DVD player after I've bought it.

Re:Wasn't Code Ruled Free Speech?

[theFool]

You just violated the DMCA... you gave me a service that I could use to violate copy protection (In so many words, you told me that my DVD player could be modded to play out-of-region disks).

That's not streatching the law any further.

Re:Wasn't Code Ruled Free Speech?

[Kindaian]

The DVD zonning is illegal by federal trade aggreaments... So actually it is a federal law against a federal law...

Cheers...

Re:Is this the fastest way to change a law in the

[pootypeople]

To change a law in the court system, a person must demonstrate actual harm; that is, unnecessary or unconstitutional government action necessary to apply a law. To change it in the legislature, one must have millions of dollars, strong connections to established corporations and industries, and possibly dirt on one or more senators/congressmen. For the average guy, changing the law is either impossible or so difficult as to be for all intents and purposes impossible. Any more questions about our fscked up system over here?

Not true at all...

[cnelzie]

First off... Doing it "Fragrantly"? You mean break the law while smelling nice? Okay... just kidding about that. I understood what you were getting at...

I have to say that you might be forgetting the fact that our penal system, in the US, is beginning to move into a commercialized configuration. There is serious money in holding criminals in jail cells whether you are the State or a corporation that is payed by the State.

Now, if you were such a corporation would you rather have hardened killers locked up in your cells, or softie computer geeks? Both could end up giving you the same amount of revenue from the State, only with the geeks there would be a VERY docile population. I don't know a large number of geeks that are able to back up many physical threats.

-.-

Re:Not true at all...

[markmoss]

I don't know a large number of geeks that are able to back up many physical threats.

True, but we can can post the REAL company books on the web, or hack into the sex offender registry and add your name. ;-)

far from it....

[tanveer1979]

When laws get opressing this is what a person who values freedom does.

The cost of freedom is high and this is what this will show. People who do not appreciate freedom dont really deserve it. Bruce wants to be free... and he dosent mind going to jail for it.

If somebody makes a law in your hometown that forbids you to reheat a particular brand of pizza wont you be up in arms.

This is not really out of context...The DVD is a particular brand of DATA you bought, you wanted to see it so you bought it...If DMCA wants to tell you how to eat your pizza..... thats pretty questionable

PPl may argue that it is tu curb Piracy... but does it. Only the avg chap who bought his fab movie for 20$$ cant see it, the pirater sits in his basement and makes a million VCD's out of it.

The lawmakers know that changing the law to make it sensible will increase the effort for lawkeepers... but if they dont want the extra effort in catching the thief why do you pay your bills and taxes... if they want to assume all citizens are thiefs until proven innocent they will get honest citizens actually acting like theifs.

To boil it down it all comes down to the ideology. Bruce has chosen freedom and he is willing to go to jail. If you are willing to sit and let them take away your freedom atleast dont insult someone who is putting up a fight atleast

Let me get this straight?

[Bake]

I might get arrested upon entering the US for doing nothing more than running a mirror site containing a region crack for my DVD player? Hell, even if I just send it to a friend via email I'm still in violation.

Just a small question, are your senators pissing the world off intentionally or is it really just by accident?

Re:Let me get this straight?

[fireweaver]

>Just a small question, are your senators pissing >the world off intentionally or is it really just >by accident?

Never blame on malice what can be explained by stupidity.

Re:Is this the fastest way to change a law in the

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, it depends what side you're on I suppose. Allow me to illustrate.

Citizens: Citizens go about changing laws by visiting their representatives, petitioning congress, and forming awareness groups to the issues that the law will address. Unfortunately they're usually never listened to unless a tragic death is involved, at which point the law will be passed with as much fanfare and gusto possible for those looking to win the next election.

Senate: Argue constantly over a given law, repeatedly producing different versions of what was originally put on the table. Eventually produce something that only vaguely resembles the original.

Big Media: Entertain the masses to grab up huge amounts of money, form a monopoly in respective industry. Use millions of dollars for "campaign contributions" that ensure various senators will help get that pesky list of draconian DRM laws passed.

I suppose American politics can all be narrowed down to such simple structures.

I like the sentiment but why?

[alecbrown]

Good on him for doing this, I'm glad he is, but the US get the cheapest DVDs anyway - why do you want to play non-US DVDs?

In the UK the DVD price is about twice as much for the same version with different region encoding so I can understand UK users hacking their DVD players and buying US DVDs from Amazon, but why in the US?

Re:I like the sentiment but why?

[EvilMagnus]

Well, in my case, it's because you can't *get* some stuff in US Region 1 DVD. For example, The Prisoner boxed set was originally only Region 2 (and it was a lot cheaper than the eventual US version - I paid $50 US for it from Amazon UK, for my region free DVD player). The same applied to the original releases of Farscape and Buffy, I believe. My current fix has been "Robin of Sherwood", the best treatment of Robin Hood *ever* put on film, which is only available in Europe (even though it's actually a Region 0 DVD according to the box - Amazon UK says its Region 2. They're wrong, I own it, and tried it out in a Region 1 player).

So yes, while I'm sure most of the trade is in US Region 1 DVDs going to modded Region 2 players, there is some trade the other way.

Re:I like the sentiment but why?

[ocbwilg]

Good on him for doing this, I'm glad he is, but the US get the cheapest DVDs anyway - why do you want to play non-US DVDs?

In the UK the DVD price is about twice as much for the same version with different region encoding so I can understand UK users hacking their DVD players and buying US DVDs from Amazon, but why in the US?

Err...it was purposely contrived that way. While it hardly makes financial sense to pay for a UK release of a DVD that is available in the US for half the price, it's really the only way to demonstrate the point in the US that region encoding and the DMCA are a steaming pile of shit.

Re:I like the sentiment but why?

[TheDefunctMunky]

From what I have heard, PAL has better quality than NTSC, which is the US's standart for broadcasts and films.

Re:I like the sentiment but why?

[walt-sjc]

Film and broadcast are completely different. NTSC has NOTHING to do with film. NTSC is the US "video" standard.

Re:I like the sentiment but why?

[alecbrown]

Fair enough, good reason.

Re:I like the sentiment but why?

[alecbrown]

PAL and NTSC are basically the number of lines on your screen. This does make a difference on VHS tapes, I don't think it has any impact on DVD discs, only the players. I may be wrong though...

Interests Re:More then just technology

[Vortran]

I don't like it any more than you do. However, one must extend one's thinking.

While it's true that large corporations tend to own the majority of eachother's stock and the "old boy's club" keeps the board of directors seats filled with folks that trade favors, the rest of the stock is owned by you and me for things like college funds for our children and our retirement.

There is a real conflict of interest between wanting to have freedom and personal liberty and not get gouged as a consumer and wanting to triple the value of your stock investment in 5 years.

The trick, as always, is to accept a healthy balance - to check one's greed, but also to expect to pay prices for things that allow healthy profits. Few people sit only on one side of the equation.

I am not disagreeing with you. The DMCA is horrible legislation and it stifles democracy. Any system in which the people can so easily be bought out is not a healthy democracy. I'm just trying to remind everyone that the interests of large corporations are not necessarily at odds with your own interests by default. It does seem the the pendulum has swung to the side of the large corporations operating as profiteering tyrants. Hopefully common sense will prevail and the pendulum will swing back toward center.

I have seen the enemy, and the enemy is me.

Vortran out

Better Civil Disobedience

[eples]

Even better would be to violate the DMCA, and then invite hundreds of people from the crowd to come up on stage and violate it as well.
Picture that on the world news : hundreds of computer users arrested for talking about DVD Region Coding.

One person thrown in jail = terrible shame.
Hundreds of people thrown in jail = message gets across.

Re:Better Civil Disobedience

[TheDefunctMunky]

My teacher used to get together with 50 to 100 people and go outside abortion clinics and tell people not to get an abortion. They all got arrested but were released after a few hours. If thats happens tomorrow, where a hundred people get arrested and get released, we will never hear any thing about it and Perens message won't get across

My prediction

[NumberSyx]

Perens will not be arrested and other than Slashdot, little or no media coverage will take place. When asked, the official spokesman for the RIAA and the MPAA, will simply state, it is not their intention to use the DMCA to stifle free speech. It will be very anticlimatic.

The advantage to this is, it could be used as leverage in the future to get people off by proving the DMCA is being applied selectivly. Maybe the DMCA hasn't been proven unconstitutional at this point, but maybe the application of the law is unconstitutional.

Re:My prediction

[Bartmoss]

Ah... but if disabling RC's is Okay, then this is a start. If talking about cracking RC protection is free speech, then talking about cracking CSS must likewise be free speech... no?

So expect the mpaa to ignore it rather than make such a statement.

Re:My prediction

[NumberSyx]

So expect the mpaa to ignore it rather than make such a statement.

I agree, whatever they do, it will be low key and not much more than a shoulder shrug.

Re:My prediction

[gnarly]

I would tend to agree but remember that the RIAA is not responsible for enforcing federal law (via lawsuits) the FBI is responsible. What if an audiance member called the FBI during the presentation and reported a "Crime in Progress" at the hotel? They would have to respond, right? Its still a crime, even if the "offended" party doesn't want the criminal prosecuted, right?

In anycase, I for one will wear my DCMA violating T-Shirt in Bruce's honor.

Re:Is this the fastest way to change a law in the

[NKJensen]

Well, that's the picture I get from the media too - but I was asking if the US legal system has built-in procedure for corrections *after* a law has been adopted.

beautiful

[Anonymous Coward]

Perens is a genious. You can't fight the DMCA by any sort of legistlative means. That is more or less a contest of money. Huge DMCA friendly corporations are always going to win there. Perens, is ignoring that useless method. He is going to proved the invalidity of the DMCA by going the the courts. The only thing they answer to (ideally, anyways) is the Constitution. Hopefully Perens will be able to argue in front of an objective judge. So many other positions of power are tainted these days. Good luck Bruce!!!

Would this cross the line enough?

[nurb432]

Well what if he offers the explanation of how to use a marker to defeat copy protected audio CD and then gives out a box of them?

Wouldnt that fall under trafficing?

Perens should do it on SNL.....

[Mozo]

Am I the only one with a mental image of John Belushi, back in the heyday of Saturday Night Live?

"The producers have told me I can do whatever I want. I will now perform a live DMCA violation on stage."

(voice-over) "Go ahead, Bruce."

"...with a member of the audience."

(voice-over) "Okay, go ahead."

RMS jumps up on stage and... oh never mind.

Maybe I am too dense...

[onlyabill]

It can happen, just ask my wife, but I do not understand how modifying a DVD player (that I purchased) to play a DVD (that I purchased) is in violation of anything. I completely understand that my copying a DVD and giving it to a friend (or god forbid, selling it) is wrong and a crime but we are not talking about that here. If the DMCA were not so broad and publisher friendly, this scenario would be considered far-use, right? So where is the problem, besides movie and record company greed?

Re:Maybe I am too dense...

[ocbwilg]

It can happen, just ask my wife, but I do not understand how modifying a DVD player (that I purchased) to play a DVD (that I purchased) is in violation of anything.

Because the DMCA (paid for by the RIAA, MPAA, Disney, AOL/TW and the rest) says so. Sure it doesn't make any sense. Sure it's ridiculous. That is exactly the point that Bruce is trying to make. The DMCA criminalizes actions that should not be criminalized.

web site for Bruce

[D0wnsp0ut]

Well, freebruce.com and freebruce.org are already taken. Someone want to register the .net, .tv, .info, .biz and .us domains to set up a "Free Bruce Perens" web site?

Circumventing Regio Coding

[Sique]

As far as I know erasing the regio code in a DVD player is pretty common here in Germany. It's even a service your electronic store offers to you for a small fee, if you are not able to do that on your own.

On the other hand a person had to give up the business to buy large quantities of Regio 1 DVDs (namely U.S. american ones) and sell them in Germany, after he got a cease-and-desist-letter.

So the situation in Germany is somewhat paradox. It seems as if a shop is allowed to offer the service to unlock the regiocode for a fee, but importing DVDs from the U.S. and selling them in Germany is not.

Re:Circumventing Regio Coding

[EvilMagnus]

And in the reverse, I regularly buy Region 2 DVD from the UK, for use in the US on my hacked Region-Free player.

The funny thing is, they're pretty cheap for me to buy. Amazon.co.uk uses Royal Mail for shipping, so international 5-7 day airmail costs me only about $4 per DVD. Also, Europe has VAT at 17.5%, which as a non-European customer, I'm exempt from. So I get 17.5% discount off the price listed in the store (thanks to the UK habit of showing all prices *including* taxes).

Finally, Amazon UK is linked to the Amazon US customer database, so I use my same account and credit card info without any problems. It's really pretty neat. ;-)

correction: felten *did* publish

[nobody/incognito]

Edward Felten, a Princeton University professor, set off another legal spark when he publicized a research paper that he claimed was the recipe for breaking the digital watermark technology Secure Digital Music Initiative (SDMI). Felten had planned to present the paper at a conference, but never did, after coming under legal pressure from the entertainment industry, which threatened to sue him and the show organizers.

felten et al. later published their paper in the usenix security conference, but only after usenix put its money and its reputation on the table by indemnifying the authors and (along with eff) countersuing the riaa and the department of justice.

usenix rocks.

nobody

It isn't a violation

[91degrees]

region coding isn't a copy prevention mechanism.

Re:It isn't a violation

[wallsaroundme]

As far as I know you have to break copy protection devices (css) to do this. I do believe that region coding has been consiered a copy prevention mech.

Re:It isn't a violation

[wallsaroundme]

now that i think about it, neither is decss. it decodes, but does not prevent copying of the disc. decompressing, yes, but not the pure copying of the disc

Re:It isn't a violation

[ocbwilg]

region coding isn't a copy prevention mechanism.

Who said anything about copy prevention? It's copyright protection and digital rights management.

Re:It isn't a violation

[jswhitten]

That's right. The purpose is to allow price discrimination.

Re:Is this the fastest way to change a law in the

[Anonymous Coward]

And he answered you. If you feel that a law is unjust, you can take it the courts. The US government gets sued all of the time over issues such as this. It's just that those cases are not as "newsworthy" as Bruce Perens getting on stage trying to piss somebody off.

If they don't shut him up first.

[supabeast!]

Bruce Perens is planning to play DVDs from various regions on a modified player. Given that the DMCA covers devices as well as actions, the MPAA could just send in the cops to confiscate the player and arrest Perens for possession before he ever gets onstage.

Just a thought.

Re:If they don't shut him up first.

[distributed.karma]

> Given that the DMCA covers devices as well as actions

How about intentions? Methinks Minority Report..

Re:If they don't shut him up first.

[White Shade]

I can just see it now ...

"Man arrested, jailed, charged for Posession of 6lbs of illegal DVD Player, street value $500,000 or more, as well as assorted paraphernalia" ...

sounds a bit dodgy to me

Re:If they don't shut him up first.

[Anonymous Coward]

since he is a lawyer, he can stonewall the cops with great efficiency.

'officer, prove it. you dont have a warrant, um get the hell out of here"

Re:If they don't shut him up first.

[supabeast!]

From the DMCA:
"(2) No person shall manufacture, import, offer to the public, provide, or otherwise traffic in any technology, product, service, device, component, or part thereof, that--

(A) is primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title;"

One way or another, knowingly possessing a chipped DVD player means that Perens has broken the law, so while he cannot be arrested for possessing the player, he can be nailed for being involved with its import and/or creation, as well as for having it to use as a "service" if showing this to the public can be construed as a service. Given the "dodgieness" of the DMCA itself, nailing him for this is quite possible.

Re:If they don't shut him up first.

[tek_hed]

"Bruce Perens, you are arrested for the future crime of ..."

Re:Is this the fastest way to change a law in the

[Anonymous Coward]

The typical way to change a law in the US is to drive a dump truck full of money up to a few congressmen, who will draft and introduce your desired legislation, then donate a shitload more to everyone else to get it passed. It's a free country, is there any other (effective) way ?

non regional DVDs will be illegal in switzerland

[Anonymous Coward]

Beginning from August 1. here in switzerland we are not even allowed to import or buy/sell (at least the businesses, I'm not sure about individuals) any other DVDs than those with region code 2.
This is going to kill some small businesses that are specializing for imported DVDs.
And more importantly, at least for me,
there are certain DVDs with code 2 that don't even have the original language audio track. And I WANT to see any film in the original spoken language with subtitles.... if it's not in english.

why we are losing

[mboedick]

Our only hope in beating things like the DMCA is to use technology. Continuing to fight in the courts and in government is fighting on the enemy's turf, where he is strongest.

Our strength is technology. Efforts should be devoted to making laws like the DMCA technologically irrelevant or unenforceable, instead of spending time and money trying to work within a corrupt system that corporations defined and corporations control.

Further, if you fight with something universal, like technology, your efforts will help combat this type of thing throughout the world, and not just in the United States.

We will never win at their game. The only way is to make them play at ours.

Future Crime?

[0biJon]

Having recently watched Minority Report, I can't help but imagine the DMCA Police arresting Bruce thirty seconds before he actually breaks the law...

Bruce: get the details out early...

[surprise_audit]

Presumably the authorities are not so stupid as to try to prevent Bruce from speaking, but as soon as he says something illegal, he's theirs...

So, Bruce, if you're listening, how about getting all the details of your speech printed up and distributed through the crowd by 100's of volunteers, and also via many websites all over the world??

It may or may not add to the size of the hole they dig for you, but at least those of us that can't attend will know what you said...

And anyone planning on attending, please take a video camera so that even if major news broadcasters decline to cover the event, the rest of us can inundate local news stations with outraged comments - "Arrested for playing a DVD" indeed!!

Where is the problem?

[selfsealingstembolt]

Here in Austria it is possible to buy code-free dvd-players completely legal in any shop. And most shops give you the possibility to remove the code-lock, if your player has one. So what?

We have a problem here...

[Andy Dodd]

Bruce is merely region-unlocking. Its not even necessarily illegal, as it often involves simply hitting a few menu buttons. (Admittedly secret ones, so it COULD violate the DMCA) - Unfortunately, it's such a minor violation that the MPAA probably won't care - They're smart and most likely realize that trying to arrest Perens is silly and will just get their precious law overturned on them for... Nothing.

Now if he plays a DVD using one of the Linux DVD players - THAT is a different story, as all of them are illegal and based on DeCSS in some form. It should be clear that he is using the DVD EXACTLY as intended (Playing a Region 1 disc in Region 1), yet still breaking the law. Since it's based on DeCSS, it'll attract more attention from the MPAA since that's their pet peeve. Also, since he is using the disc exactly as intended, it makes his case that much stronger.

An interesting story: A friend of mine found a lawyer willing to help him with defense against an ITAR violation. (Read: Exporting strong encryption before the government eased up on regulations.) He then implemented RSA on his HP48 calculator. Calculator is now a munition. Justin lived in San Diego, so drove down to Tijuana. In the process of crossing the border, he carefully explained to the border guard/customs officer the exact manner in which he was breaking the law and should be arrested. Customs officer basically told him to fuck off, leave him alone, and go do his business in Tijuana.

Re:We have a problem here...

[mwa]

it's such a minor violation that the MPAA probably won't care

The point is that it doesn't matter if the MPAA cares or not. The DMCA is The Law (TM) and law enforcement is required to enforce it.

Re:We have a problem here...

[liquidsin]

As somebody else noted, it doesn't matter whether or not the MPAA cares, since it's still a violation of a law. As much as they may want to be, the MPAA is NOT a law enforcement agency. That's like saying that General Motors wouldn't care if I only drive 10 km/h over the speed limit, so I shouldn't get a ticket. And since I managed to get a response from Bruce himself the other day, I'll try it again: Hey Bruce! Big props for the idea. It's always good to see someone willing to fight the good fight. If we had a DMCA equivalent in Canada I'd be looking for ways to shoot it down. Let's hope it never comes to that though. And while you're at it, why not piss off the RIAA too and show up with some Celine Dion cds and a felt tipped marker.

Re:We have a problem here...

[Pig Hogger]

A friend of mine found a lawyer willing to help him with defense against an ITAR violation. (Read: Exporting strong encryption before the government eased up on regulations.) He then implemented RSA on his HP48 calculator. Calculator is now a munition. Justin lived in San Diego, so drove down to Tijuana. In the process of crossing the border, he carefully explained to the border guard/customs officer the exact manner in which he was breaking the law and should be arrested. Customs officer basically told him to fuck off, leave him alone, and go do his business in Tijuana.

Like if a customs officer at Tijuana had nothing else to worry about...

Re:We have a problem here...

[imadork]

In the process of crossing the border, he carefully explained to the border guard/customs officer the exact manner in which he was breaking the law and should be arrested. Customs officer basically told him to fuck off, leave him alone, and go do his business in Tijuana.

I have no experience with Mexican border guards, who probably have more than enough problems and didn't want your friend adding to them, but based on my experience at the Canadian border, I'll tell you exactly what his problem was:

U.S. customs officers normally don't give a damn what you leave the country with. Coming back is a different matter altogether. He should have informed the officer of his exploits on the return trip. It would have generated much more interest then. Although it might have generated the same ultimate result, with the officer telling him to proceed about his business in Tiajuana!

Re:We have a problem here...

[Bruce Perens]

I do have to leave some time for my talk, so I will probably limit the number of demos. But maybe I'll try the Celine Dion and a black marker thing. So far, I can't get either of my DVD-equipped laptops to work with DeCSS. Maybe someone else should bring one.

Bruce

Re:We have a problem here...

[MrResistor]

Not true in this case. The law prohibited export only. Importing encryption was perfectly legal.

Re:We have a problem here...

[Anonymous Coward]

Bruce - good luck!

And thank you for volunteering to be the test case.

Douglas Reay

Re:We have a problem here...

[hughk]

Are the drives region-locked? Remember that the region lock is usually in the firmware as well as the player. All modern drives are shipped with a firmware region lock. Modified firmware is available from a number of places (such as this) to defeat the lock. After that, the data files should be easily accessible by DECSS.

Re:We have a problem here...

[porkface]

If you play Celine Dion in public, you deserve to be arrested.

Re:We have a problem here...

[philovivero]

Bruce, download and try the Videolan Client, which is available for both Linux and Windows, and includes libdvdcss as part of the distribution.

As far as I'm concerned, the DVD (region-free and encrypted) playback is flawless on a Linux box, assuming your DVD player is a normal IDE device (ie: not also a DVD r/w).

Videolan dot Org

Re:We have a problem here...

[Anonymous Coward]

You're all under arrest.

(Perhaps bring a small desktop box instead of the laptop)

How specific do you need to be to violate DMCA?

[AtariDatacenter]

I've always wondered how specific and clear you need to be in order to violate the DMCA? If I were to instruct people to, "disable the regional protection in the DVD", is that enough? Is a step-by-step enough if some people understand? Or is saying how to do it not a violation?

Today's Dilbert!

[Anonymous Coward]

Today's Dilbert is quite applicable to the current situation in America

http://dilbert.com/comics/dilbert/archive/dilber t- 20020724.html

I thought it was quite funny anyway :)

Re:Today's Dilbert!

[famazza]

The lowest score to the best comment.

Please, mod him up!

What the hell are you talking about?

[battjt]

What the hell are you talking about?

We are the government. We decide how it works. We have chosen that this is the way we want it to work.

YOU vote for someone else if you don't like it.

The "anti globalization" and "anti corporate" crap is getting on my nerves. Corporations do what the owners want them to. Guess what? We own the corporations too!

Do you think there is some other species that runs corporations and work for the government?

My brother regulates the telecom industry in Indiana. I have a close friend that works investment for life insurance companies. I build custom software for companies. Each one of us makes decisions every day that has an effect on the economy and dictates which companies will succeed and which will fail. Each of us votes for candidates that are responsive to us. This is us, not them. There is no them.

Joe

Re:What the hell are you talking about?

[gabbarsingh]

This is us, not them. There is no them.

There wasn't and now there is. The real reason behind this is incompetence. It reflects in the failure of businesses to recognize that the technology has evolved beyond the point that their business models don't make sense. Either they have to honestly make an effort to be smarter and address a demanding customer or die. Or better yet, buy few of our senators, executives, law enforcement.

Re:What the hell are you talking about?

[IndependentVik]

YOU vote for someone else if you don't like it.

"Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos."

Re:What the hell are you talking about?

[battjt]

It reflects in the failure of businesses...

Show me these businesses? I'll point to people.

Either they have to honestly make an effort to be smarter and address a demanding customer or die.

Exactly. There is no them; WE are in control. Why are WE blaming them (the big corps, big government, etc.) for choices that we make? Just quit sending money to companies you don't like. Quit voting for representative that don't agree with your opinion. Convince your neighbors that you are right, or suck it up and realize that you are a minority, not oppressed by big corps and big government (which only have the authority that WE grant them), just a minority voice.

Joe

A good thing

[I_am_God_Here]

A true warrior for the cause. Many of us sit and complain because we don't have the power to change things, others sit and cry because they have the power but are to afraid of getting fined or going to jail. But sometimes people have to go to jail for the message to get out.

Throughout history the successful freedom fighters have been willing to be persecuted for their beliefs. Martin Luther King was jailed, Gandhi was persecuted, the Dali Lama, Jesus, Washington, the list goes on indefinitely...

The point is if something is worth fighting for you have to be willing to make some personal sacrifice.

This won't work...

[kcbrown]

...unless my understanding of how criminal and civil law works in the U.S. is badly flawed.

Remember that the prosecution has a huge incentive to keep the law on the books so it can be used to bludgeon people into submission. In a civil case, the plaintiff will of course be the content control people, while in a criminal case the prosecution will be the government. Since the government is basically the big corporations' bitch, it will do whatever the big corporations tell it to do. For brevity's sake, we'll roll the plaintiff and the prosecution into one, and call them the "bad guys".

So what does this mean in practice? It means that the bad guys will take the litigation as far as they can until they reach a point where a court ruling would set a precedent against their pet law.

Now, lower courts seem to be very reluctant to rule on Constitutional issues, so the only way you're going to get a lower court to rule against the DMCA is through more traditional means, like proof that the defendant didn't actually violate the DMCA. But that kind of argument is obviously counterproductive for the purposes of striking down the DMCA, so we'll have to assume that Perens' defense won't use it. So the lower courts will almost certainly rule against Perens.

So now it's on to the higher courts, at least at the district level. What I think will happen here is that the case will be litigated heavily, with the bad guys doing everything they can to extend the litigation. If it appears that there's a reasonable chance the judge will rule against the bad guys, then the bad guys will drop the charges right before the ruling. End result? No precedent set against use of the DMCA in that district, and maximal financial damage to the defendant.

I think this is exactly how it will play out in every case. It'll turn into a war of attrition, and the bad guys have many times the resources of the good guys, so the bad guys will win.

Most importantly, it will result in justice only for those with the cash to fight long enough to wind up in a court that would rule against the "bad guys". In other words, justice proportional to the amount of money one has, which seems to be the American Way.

Re:This won't work...

[bobetov]

I think this is exactly how it will play out in every case. It'll turn into a war of attrition, and the bad guys have many times the resources of the good guys, so the bad guys will win.

Guess it's time for all us CD-pirating scum to drain the coffers of those bad guys. I think I'll go steal 5 or 6 CD's worth of money from the RIAA right now. In a couple of weeks, they'll be broke!

Right? Uh...

Re:This won't work...

[mach-5]

Since the government is basically the big corporations' bitch, it will do whatever the big corporations tell it to do.

This is not entirely true...big corps can lobby congressman but not judges and juries...this is why the judicial branch exists, so that the checks and balances in the system can iron out any "evil" conflicts of interest. If the law is truly unconstitutional, it will be stricken off the books, eventually.

Re:This won't work...

[kcbrown]

This is not entirely true...big corps can lobby congressman but not judges and juries...

True. But the part of the government that is under control of the big corps in this case will be the prosecution. At the federal level, this means Attorney General John Ashcroft.

What, you think the fact that the government is pursuing the case against Dmitri Sklyarov in spite of Adobe's apparent wishes to the contrary is an accident? No, Adobe's public stance is that the charges against Sklyarov should be dropped, but you can bet that they told the feds in private to stick it to him.

The strategy I discuss in my previous posting depends on the corporations' control of the prosecution, not the judiciary.

Re:This won't work...

[Fascist Christ]

If it appears that there's a reasonable chance the judge will rule against the bad guys, then the bad guys will drop the charges right before the ruling.

The keyword here: IF. They will not drop charges unless it is clear that the judge is favoring the "good guy." And if they do drop the case?

End result? No precedent...

This is not entirely true. Yes, there will not be any legal ruling to help you in your case against the DMCA. But you can still obtain the information on the trial and model your defense after it. It's all on record.

Plus, if a company sees that 95% of these cases get dropped with no ruling, then they are a lot less likely to take legal action.

Re:This won't work...

[MrResistor]

I would think that if that happened enough times a judge would eventually notice and not allow the charges to be dropped, sort of like what happened with Rambus. Some judges really don't like having their powers circumvented, especially through that sort of "judge shopping".

HP Sponsors Perens

[diatonic]

I would think HP would handle it. They do sponsor his speaking activities on open source. I would also think HP's legal team would handle any defense that he needed if charged.

just my assumptions though.

.:diatonic:.

Where is Stallman?

[Anonymous Coward]

After all of Stallman's windbaggery about the moral turpitude of the "open source movement", it turns out that Perens is the guy with the real courage of his convictions.

American's do mind

[SlowMovingTarget]

American's don't mind if foreign people are arrested...

I'm an American. It bothered me.

If you mean that the media didn't give it the coverage it deserved, I'd agree with that. It's likely, however, that the stories they were allowed to cover did not include ones that weren't in the interests of the parent companies (AOL Time Warner for example).

--

The opinions expressed in this post are my own and not necessarily those of my employer.

Re:American's do mind

[Anonymous Coward]

Indeed... I think there is a real difference between Americans and the American media. There are many Americans who would care if a foreign person were arrested, however the American media wouldn't give a rat's ass, and it is entirely dominated by corporations whose only interest is money and whose only emotion is greed.

Gist of my post:

Most American People - Good
Most American Media - Bad

Re:American's do mind

[ShoeHead]

You're an idiot. He was claiming that about most of the American Public, not radical wannabe activists like you.

No worries.

[Mulletproof]

I don't think he'll have a problem showing off his modded DVD player on stage. Remember the outcry over Dmitry Sklyarov? It would be a thousand times worse if the BSA mafia marched on stage and arrested him on the spot. Creating such a high profile will certainly buffer himself from any consequences... At this point, I'd love to see them try... It's just another nail in the BSA coffin.

Re:No worries.

[Anonymous Coward]

Fuck you, nigger. Why don't you suck a jewboy's cock. You nigger faggot.

Slashdot flaw: Funny > interesting/insightful

[Pooh22]

I can't help but notice that in this particular topic Funny seems to be the more popular rating...

Either the current set of moderators is on pills or worse, or the system is so flawed that a Funny:5 outweighs an Interesting:5 or Insightful:5 (or Informative:5).

I would suggest that a topic with an informative (or other serious positive attribute) rated comment should be placed above a similarly rated Funny rating. (Sorry for the spurious use of Rate* ;-)

To me this is a topic devoid of any Fun. The mere fact that there are so many comments rated as funny suggests that posters/moderators are trying to reduce the seriousness of this topic.

Or is Slashdot secretly manipulated by DMCA supporters trying to limit the damage to their reputation ;-)

Oh well, paranoia can only go so far...

Simon

Amazing

[rundgren]

that you risk jail in the USA doing something that probably half of the DVDplayer-owning population here in Norway does once in a while.

Bruce = Open Source Jesus?

[caluml]

Doesn't it say something about this in the Bible?

"Bruce gave his life, so others might watch DVDs on their Linux boxen..."

Re:Is this the fastest way to change a law in the

[Anonymous Coward]

Get your case into the supreme court and have it deemed unconstitutional. If congress amends the constitution to make it constitutional, you are kind of screwed.

Magic Marker Time

[alanjstr]

Why do I have a strong feeling he's just going to use a black marker on an audio cd?

Re:Magic Marker Time

[djtack]

Read the article, please. It states that he is going to apply a firmware hack to a DVD player to disable region locking. There are no black markers or audio CD's involved.

Re: Magic Marker Time

[pjrc]

He's going to go after defeating region locking, not copy protection.

Defeat copy protection, and you're a pirate.

Defeat region locking, and you're a screwed-over consumer who's just trying to play the DVDs you legally purchased.

Re: Magic Marker Time

[evbergen]

Defeat copy protection, and you're a pirate.

Ugh. Defeat copy protection, and you're re-enabling fair use.

Distribute copies en masse, then you're a pirate.

Or where you just expressing how John Q. Public is likely to perceive this?

Hit 'em in the pocketbook

[McSnickered]

I know this is not feasible, and with the relatively tiny population of Slashdot wouldn't even make a dent - but if people want the likes of the MPAA to listen, then stop buying their DVD's. If people are tired of bizarre CD encryption that disallows a person to play a CD on a computer - stop buying CD's.

Again, I know it would never work, but it's the most effective way to get corporate attention. Their sole objective is, understandibly, money. So if you take that away from them and tell 'em why - THEN maybe they'll listen. Until that happens ~ good luck BRUCE!

public exhibition

[Savatte]

Since his demonstration involves a DVD player, he should make sure not to play a movie, lest he get fined an extra $250,000 for an illegal public exhibition of a movie.

Re:public exhibition

[foo12]

I'm guessing he'd just show a clip which, as part of a lecture / speech, falls under fair use. But then again, fair use is a damned loose and losing term these days.

Bruce Parens is in for a surprise

[aderusha]

The DVD's he bought in London (Gladiator and AI, two absolutely terrible movies) are not only region locked, they are almost certainly PAL format video. Bypassing the region lock is a pretty trivial task these days on a number of popular DVD players. Bypassing the fact that he has an NTSC television and is trying to view a PAL DVD is going to require some more hardware...

Dmitri at Defcon

[Skevin]

I wish I were present at Dmitri Sklyarov's presentation at Defcon. When the Fed came up to arrest him, we should have come up on stage and said, "If you take him, you'll need to arrest me too," similar to Ghandi's or MLK's passive resistance.
Not to mention at Defcon, you don't have to provide documentation of *who* you are when you register, so if some 300 arrestees don't have any identification (other than going by names like L0pht or Captain Cornholio), Uncle Sam must make a decision on just how much effort He needs to exert to determine the identity and background of a few hundred potentially innocent attendees. If He exerts *too* much pressure, then you get a nice media circus on your hands.
Probably more difficult at OSCon, since we have to give out or names and other personal info to register, but if Bruce makes it through this one, I would encourage him to do it again in two weeks in Vegas (Defcon). If all of us throw ourselves into the arms of an arresting authority during the process of attempting to enforce some idiotic law, they will not be able to suppress it quietly without garnering negative attention of the media.
What's that, you say? A class has only a hundred or so people who can participate in a passive resistance campaign when the shit hits the fan? No problem: the moment the arrest occurs, the person closest to the door zips out of the room, screaming some code phrase (i.e. "The British are coming!") while running down the convention halls of Alexis Park. Even if the Feds prevent him from leaving the room, he can still shout it loud enough that someone *outside* the room will hear it, who will then propagate the message as previously mentioned... Voila! *Several* hundred geeks now flood the room in a passive resistance campaign, willfully subjecting themselves to arrest (which won't happen when there are such large numbers).
Those who don't make it into the room before the FBI temporarily barricades the doors should be speed-dialing their favorite newspaper/news-station/journalist, guaranteeing that *when* the doors open, everyone will be greeted in the warm and loving arms of the media.
Why go through such measures? Because the general public doesn't even know what the DMCA is. Having gone this far in its legislation, the only was to bring attention to this law is to publicly violate it in extremely large numbers (or publicly support a violator in extremely large numbers), and on camera, publicly show that you are willing to be arrested for what you believe in.

Solomon

Re:Dmitri at Defcon

[Pig Hogger]

I wish I were present at Dmitri Sklyarov's presentation at Defcon. When the Fed came up to arrest him, we should have come up on stage and said, If you take him, you'll need to arrest me too, similar to Ghandi's or MLK's passive resistance.

You'd have been arrested, indeed, but charged for obstructing a police officer...

Re:Dmitri at Defcon

[Nutcase]

If i honestly believed there was a chance in hell of this happening, I would take a few weeks off and fly up there. Never been arrested for fundamental rights before. Figure its about time to start.

Re:Dmitri at Defcon

[MaxVlast]

But you didn't. And it doesn't sound like you're going to the OSC.

Not to be a jerk, but it bugs me when people say things like "ooh, if I was there, they'd have seen!" It's mendacious.

... gets arrested and then jailed nothing ...

[dpilot]

IMHO, if he is arrested and jailed, it may well be as good as if he wins, outright.

Right now, the closest all of this copyright mess gets to the American public is Napster, but at least that is something Joe 6pak understands. Now take a look at the current outrage against high-level corporate greed, and it isn't difficult at all to apply that to the media industries. In other words, in today's climate it isn't difficult at all to smear the sh*t of Enron and Worldcom on the RIAA and MPAA, too.

So now we have Bruce Perens carefully defining and orchestrating a challenge to a law that helps keep the RIAA and MPAA filthy rich. If he's arrested and wins, he's chipped away and circumscribed the DMCA a little. If he's arrested, loses, and is sent to jail, we have Big Media harrassing an ordinary citizen for "no reason at all." (After all, Joe 6pak can't understand the fine points of the DMCA, right?)

Maybe Perens wins, maybe he's an American prisoner in the American Bastille. (Maybe this is all wishful thinking, too.)

you go, Bruce...

[Lwood_at_COG]

I compliment you on your gumption and will continue to fully support these kinds of activities.

Sincerely,
J. E. Francis

What an idiot.

[erat]

Violating the law in front of a crowd won't get the law changed. It'll only get Bruce in trouble.

Re:What an idiot.

[Mudcathi]

Violating the law in front of a crowd won't get the law changed. It'll only get Bruce in trouble.

Burning your Viet Nam era draft card won't get the law changed, it'll only get you in trouble.

Standing in front of a tank in Tianneman Square won't get the law changed, it'll only get you in trouble.

Disguising yourself as an Indian & throwing tea in Boston Harbor won't get the law changed, it'll only get you in trouble.

To many, the real idiots are those who don't stand up for what they believe in, consequences be damned. A few brave *someones* have always stood in the breach, to the benefit of the many.

Re:What an idiot.

[erat]

All of the things you threw out in your email did nothing to change the laws either.

My point remains. There are ways to get laws changed, and then there are ways to try to look like a hero while actually doing nothing but getting a photo op. Me, I'll revere the folks who take action, not the folks who cause mischief. All of the examples you mentioned entailed mischief and did absolutely, positively, undeniably nothing to change anything.

Hey, maybe Bruce can dress in an Indian costume and rip up his Selective Service card while tossing handfuls of Boston tea onto a Chinese tank. That would be about as effective as his little stunt would have been, plus it would give me some cool pictures to laugh at.

Familiar Plan

[xidix]

Perens' protest plan:

"The DVD industry uses regional encoding to control consumers, so we're going to play this UK DVD on a US player."

reminds me of a plan we've seen before:

"Terrence and Phillip are supposed to be killed, so we think we should crank call a bunch of policeman and have pizzas sent to them that they didn't order. Viva la resistance!"

I think we need a snobby kid who attended Yardale and had a 4.0 grade point average to come up with something a little more effective.

Oh, yeah. And Kyle's mom is a bitch.

revolution!

[Vodak]

What he thinks will happen...
1. He will be arrested in a massive arrest were he will be beat by the police for breaking the DMCA

2. We will become a political prisonor and the geeks of the worlds will unit in a rage.

3. In protest the IT workers of the world will stop doing thier jobs and start hacking the systems they work for crippling the systems of the world.

4. The world now in chaos from geek rage will fold to any and all of the silly geek deamdns including the head of Bill gates.

5. World Peace.

What will happen....
1. People will point at him and giggle.

Re:revolution!

[jsse]

In summary...

1. DMCA
2.
3. World Peace!

Is the DMCA Constitutional?

[TibbonZero]

But isn't that against everything this county is based on?
We should make "Coding" into a religion perhaps, then we could publish books with code in them that couldn't be deems illegal? They would be infringing on our rights? How about we call it CowBoyNeilism?

So why in the world isn't the DMCA unconstitutional?

Re:Is the DMCA Constitutional?

[a_n_d_e_r_s]

It is unconstitutional. But when has that stopped the congress to vote for the law.

As it is only the supreme court can say it is unconstitutional and revoke DMCA.

Re:Is the DMCA Constitutional?

[certron]

"We should make "Coding" into a religion perhaps, then we could publish books with code in them that couldn't be deems illegal? They would be infringing on our rights? How about we call it CowBoyNeilism?"

How about Codeboy Nihlism? Hm...
Nihilism (edited):
2. The doctrine that nothing can be known; scepticism as to all knowledge and reality. [1913 Webster]
1. a revolutionary doctrine that advocates destruction of the social system for its own sake. [wordnet]

Hm... Maybe a little too close to Slashdot reality at times...

Re:Is the DMCA Constitutional?

[Martin Blank]

Actually, any judge of competent jurisdiction may find something unconstitutional and strike it down. Whether the appeals courts reverse it is another matter. There are many cases where a law is struck down at the trial level, and the appeals courts and the Supreme Court refuse to review the case, meaning the original judge's decision stands.

Re:Is the DMCA Constitutional?

[Dyolf Knip]

In the beginning, there was the command line...

Shamelessly taken from the book of the same name by Neal Stephenson.

Nothing is going to happen

[Sloppy]

Bruce will perform his demonstration, and nobody will try to stop him or attack him.

They'll just let it go.

And then, the next guy who violates DMCA, who doesn't have as much ability to defend himself or a black-and-white good-vs-evil case, will be attacked. People will still continue to live in fear of their government and campaign-contributing companies.

Can it be "conspiracy"?

[Pig Hogger]

Now that he announced at large his intention to break the law, just wait to see some of Ashcroft's goons waiting to pick him up as soon as he walks on the stage, and charge him with conspiracy.

When the DMCA is an excuse

[lfourrier]

Some tell that dezoning DVD player is breaking DMCA.
It could equally be regarded as a correction agains DVD zones, which are obviously contrary to World Trade Organization recommendations.
Perhaps some line of defense could be that the violation was necessary to combat illegal behaviour from the MPAA...

Considering the penalties...

[Inoshiro]

Wouldn't it just be better to murder someone in front of all these witnesses? Less jail time, less of a fine.

Or he could embezzle a few billion from HP, and only have to spend 5 years in a white-collar resort prison.

Re:Considering the penalties...

[IndependentVik]

Or he could embezzle a few billion from HP, and only have to spend 5 years in a white-collar resort prison.

As opposed to federal "pound you in the ass" prison?

http://perens.com/

[Anonymous Coward]

http://perens.com/

For great justice

[mrnobo1024]

In A.D. 1988
War was beginning.

Bruce: What happen ?
Someone set up us the DMCA.
Bruce: What ?
MPAA: How are you gentlemen !
MPAA: All your rights are belong to us.
MPAA: You have no chance to play DVDs make your time.
MPAA: Ha ha ha ha...
Bruce: Take off every 'region coding' !
Bruce: For great justice.

YHBT. YHL. HAND

[Anonymous Coward]

Who's the moron? Sprichen English?

The difference between theory and practice.

[Andy Dodd]

Did you bother to read my post?

It doesn't matter if it is The Law in theory - Sometimes things are so minor that The Man just doesn't care. My friend TRIED to get arrested for an ITAR violation.

That border guard was, by your definiton, "required" to enforce it and arrest Justin. Did he? As someone else pointed out, he had bigger problems to deal with than some stupid export restriction on something so stupid as encryption.

No one is going to arrest Bruce unless the MPAA asks them to on their behalf. The FBI didn't just say, "Hey, look at this guy, I think he's violating the DMCA" on their own when they busted Skylarov. Adobe said, "This guy is violating the DMCA by screwing with our product. Please arrest him for us."

So to make a difference, Bruce must not only break The Law, but he must make The Man care enough to take him to court where the DMCA can be struck down. As someone pointed out earlier, a singular failuer to enforce a law doesn't invalidate it, and the MPAA knows this. If Bruce region-unlocks a DVD, he's seen as a whiner about the way the MPAA goes about his business. If Bruce plays a Region 1 DVD under Linux, he's breaking the law, but the Court of Public Opinion is guaranteed to side with him, and most likely so will the Court of Law.

Re:The difference between theory and practice.

[mwa]

Yes, I read your post. The difference between what Perens is doing and what your friend did is publicity. Skylarov was arrested because the FBI was notified that a public violation was going to occur. Adobe made the notification, but it could have been anyone. Perens is creating the exact same circumstances, except he is serving notice that a public violation will occur.

Now, whether or not law enforcement chooses to enforce it under these conditions is yet to be seen. If they do, the case goes to a court of law. If they don't, it goes to the court of public opinion and provides for open discourse and debate as to why law enforcement did not enforce the law.

Your friend failed to get enough publicity to press the case in the public eye. Bruce may fail as well, but that's where /.'ers can actually make a difference by calling attention to what he's doing.

Re:The difference between theory and practice.

[Andy Dodd]

Yes, Perens has a distinct advantage in the chances of what he's doing attracting attention.

My point is still that he can get farther with both a court of law and a court of public opinion if he can break the law while using a product as intended - In this case, simply viewing a legit Region 1 disc in Region 1 on an unsanctioned platform.

Region-unlocking doesn't look as good to the public nor to the courts, and some people even speculated that region unlocking might not even fall under the DMCA to begin with, while it's been confirmed that DeCSS WILL get you busted for a DMCA violation. (i.e. no matter how much publicity it gets, he may likely not get arrested for region unlocking, while if he makes it clear he's using a derivative of the law-breaking evil DeCSS, his chances of getting arrested are much higher, AND his chances of succeeding in smacking down the DMCA are much higher.)

Re:Google removing listing big stink

[Opie812]

I'll send a buck as well...although it's only worth 60 cents American.

Stupid Canadian dollar.

Re:Google removing listing big stink

[Anonymous Coward]

Yea I hear ya buddy....

better send him two bucks!

Laws, Laws, Laws

[Anonymous Coward]

DMCA is just another example of the infringement on the freedom of a nation whose elected politicians have no appreciation for anything but their give-and-take with large corporations and institutions like the MPAA.

I was watching the movie "Hiroshima" and the way President Trueman and the rest of the gang were manipulated by the military to use the Atomic bomb against Japan despite the outcry of the scientists, and it was exactly the way I see America today. Bush, being illiterate himself, gets "advised" by such cowards as Condoleezza Rice, John Ashkroft, and Donald Rumsfeld [a.k.a the "axis of evil"]. So you see, America is a military/police state. Who care's about your freedoms.

Cheers to anyone who challenges these cowards and the congressmen and senators. They are not there to work for the good of the nation, they are there because they like being lobbied and paid to pass laws and get something in return.

Nothing will happen.

[Pig Hogger]

He will not be arrested for breaking the DMCA, since region-breaking is not circumventing a copyright-protection device, especially if he owns the british license to whatever flick he's gonna show.

Perhaps he could get in trouble for either

• Having a public performance of the movie he'll be showing (verboten under consumer movie licensing).
• Breaking the terms of the DVD-CCA license.
• Importing a non DVD-CCA compliant DVD player.

All this, perhaps, but most probably not for breaking the DMCA.

Re:Nothing will happen.

[schon]

He will not be arrested for breaking the DMCA

Maybe, maybe not, but not because of your reasoning (below)

region-breaking is not circumventing a copyright-protection device

Perhaps, but it is circumventing a mechanism which restricts access to a copyrighted work, and this is a violation of the DMCA.

I stand

[Anonymous Coward]

I stand behind this guy, I don't know about you fellas.

Boucher supported the DMCA

[MagPulse]

A re-post from the Slashdot Boucher story:

Before you support Rep. Boucher, you should know he supported the DMCA in 1998.

"...I am pleased to rise today in support of the passage of H.R. 2281, which will extend new protections against the theft of their works to copyright owners."

Full text of his DMCA speech:

DIGITAL MILLENNIUM COPYRIGHT ACT (House of Representatives - August 04, 1998)

Mr. BOUCHER. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Frank) for yielding this time to me, and I am pleased to rise today in support of the passage of H.R. 2281, which will extend new protections against the theft of their works to copyright owners.

Madam Speaker, new protections are needed due to the ease with which flawless copies of copyrighted materials can both be made and transmitted in the digital network environment. Essential, however, to the creation of new guarantees for copyright owners is the retention of the traditional rights of the users of intellectual property. A balance has always existed in our law between these conflicting interests, and the major challenge in the writing of this legislation is to assure that no fundamental altering of that delicate balance takes place.

Another challenge is to ensure that in the effort to eliminate devices that are designed and produced to make illegal copies of copyrighted materials, that legitimate consumer electronics products are not also placed in a category of legal uncertainty.

Today I want to offer congratulations primarily to the Members of the House Committee on Commerce who have devoted long hours in the effort to assure that these challenges are met. Specifically, the Committee on Commerce has added provisions that protect personal privacy by clearly permitting personal computer owners to disable cookies that are placed on their disks by others; that allow the encryption research that will lead to a new generation of trusted and secure systems; that give equipment manufacturers the certainty that their consumer electronics products need not affirmatively accommodate all technological protection measures; and that creative procedure for assuring the continuation of the fair use rights of the American public, a procedure that will prevent material that is generally available today under fair use being locked away in a pay-per-use regime in future years.

[TIME: 1400]

Report language also specifies that the technological protection measure circumvention restrictions will not apply when manufacturers, retailers and technicians need to make adjustments to devices to ensure that their performance is not degraded as a consequence of the installation of a technological protection measure. These changes, taken together, significantly improve the original legislation.

The gentleman from Virginia (Chairman Bliley), the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell), the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Klug), the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Stearns) and the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey), among others, deserve thanks for their successful efforts to create new copyright protections, while ensuring that traditional user rights are not undermined.

The Committee on Commerce has, in the manner for which it is known, mastered the intricate details of this complex subject and has produced a balanced result. I want to offer my congratulations to all who have been involved in that outstanding effort.

It is my pleasure to urge passage of H.R. 2281.

Madam Speaker, I will insert in the record correspondence from the subcommittee chairman, the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Coble), to the gentleman from California (Mr. Campbell) and myself, which further defines the terminology that is used in the statute.

To see the full text:

1. Click here
2. Click on the link for #14
3. Do a browser search for "boucher", click on the link

Re:Boucher supported the DMCA

[gmhowell]

Thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you.

I've been looking for information along these lines for a week or so. I knew things couldn't be perfect with the guy. Again. Thank you.

Re:Boucher supported the DMCA

[UncleFluffy]

Know anything about deaf-blind tech? Please let me know [slashdot.org].

Hmm, for some reason, /. tells me "This discussion has been archived" when I try and reply in your journal.

Anway, try talking to these people. Nice folks. If they don't have anything that could help, I'm pretty sure that they will be able to point you in the right direction.

Re:Boucher supported the DMCA

[dafunn]

To play devil's advocate here, Boucher supported that document in '98. What's to say he hasn't realized the error of his ways and turned his back on the Dark Side(tm)?

Re:Boucher supported the DMCA

[Danse]

Actually, I thought I remembered him saying something to that effect in an article a while back. That he had originally supported the DMCA, but later came to realize how it could be abused, and then saw such abuses happening. I can't find the article now though. Maybe I'm thinking of someone else.

Re:Boucher supported the DMCA

[gmhowell]

Thanks for the heads up on the journal. Fixed .sig.

And thanks for the link.

Re:Boucher supported the DMCA

[dafunn]

I think this article is the one to which you're referring. This editorial was posted on January 29th of this year and appears to be from the Boucher in question. It basically says that he (Boucher) doesn't like the version of the DMCA that is in use and that it ignores the fair use rights consumers (and others) have had for a century and a half (his words).

PAL vs NTCS Format

[north.coaster]

Is the PAL/NTSC issue applicable to DVD players? If so, did Bruce really run into a region code problem, or did he simply buy some PAL format DVDs that cannot be played in his NTSC-compatible DVD player?

/Don

Re:PAL vs NTCS Format

[grungie]

Yes that's still applicable but I think you're mistaking video signaling specs for digital encoding/storage.

DVDs are neither PAL nor NTSC or SECAM, that's the signal between your player and your TV set (which means that your player needs to support the same signaling standard as your TV, but lots of players do nowadays).

Video DVDs are just optical disks that store (encrypted) MPEG-2 video. Wether your player support PAL or NTSC or both is a totally different matter.

My 2 eurocents

Re:PAL vs NTCS Format

[EABinGA]

Sir, you are mistaken.

I used to believe that too.

There are PAL and NTSC DVDs. If you play them on a computer, it really doesn't matter (exept PAL has 25 frames / sec and higher resolution, NTSC has 29.97 fps and a lower resolution)

There are players, that can play PAL DVDs on NTSC Tvs and vica versa, but that is not a given.

Turn the lecture into 'performance art'

[LittleGuy]

If you're going to use 'free speech' as a legal defense, why not turn it into performance art?

(Of course, if you can get {insert favorite attractive celebrity} to perform it, it would be an added bonus.)

Re:Is this the fastest way to change a law in the

[pootypeople]

Unless, of course, you and a bunch of your buddies (from the fifty states) either petition the government for redress of grievances (provided for in the constitution) or organize a constitutional convention (also provided for). The rules are, like most other things in the constitution, left vague, but citizens can practice issue/constitutional advocacy on their own. Whether or not the government would recognize these types of actions as legitimate is up for grabs; if enough people were involved it would make political sense to pay attention; however, if enough people were that fed up, it would already have been dealt with by congress. Right now, our only way to really get issues decided as the people want them is to get on TV somehow, piss a whole lot of people off and in doing so, get congress involved. If it's against corporate interests, that may not even be enough.

So what's that all mean? Democracy, as we think we know it in the US, is a joke. That much was proved by the wonderful election of 2000. If an honest accounting of the votes can be stopped by an appointed judicial panel (who are completely unaccountable, especially since the serve life terms), then we're not living in any type of democracy. Corporate control of representative bodies also shows us what's really going on. On top of that Herr Ashcroft and Mein Fuhrer Bush are doing the best they can to dismantle whatever protections the Constitution had for our personal liberties. Frankly, I'm not too impressed with anything the US does anymore. We can't even keep our constitution sacred, so all our high-minded principles pretty much mean turd anyways.

Worst part is, I love America and everything it stands for. I just detest this country, because evil men have ruined what was great about it.

In case you want to be proactive

[fobbman]

freeperens.com, freeperens.org, and freeperens.net are available.

Cue Judas Priest!

[Jason0x21]

"Breakin' the Law! Breakin the Law!"

Follow-through action

[Ogerman]

So, if Mr. Perens is arrested, how many of you so-called geeks are going to boycott Hollywood movies, RIAA music, cancel your cable/dish TV, etc. I hope every single one of you--for anyone who does not is a flaming hypocrite. And you'd better spread the word to your neighbors as well. DMCA is no small violation of our basic freedoms and it needs fought tooth and nail.

And like any good boycott, you can help promote substitutes as well:
- off-air television (get yourself a Terk TV-55 or similar)
- local bands / unsigned online artists
- independent films
- trade existing movies with friends but don't buy into anything new

Re:Follow-through action

[nege]

I allready activley boycott the RIAA. I have been CD free for like 7 months. And I try to talk everyone else out of buying them too.

Re:Follow-through action

[Anonymous Coward]

I hope every single one of you--for anyone who does not is a flaming hypocrite.

You assume the entire audience of /. is vocally opposed to this? As long as I haven't said anything, not doing anything does not make me a hypocrite.

Re:Follow-through action

[Zayin]

- off-air television (get yourself a Terk TV-55 or similar)

Just get rid of the goddamn thing. I tossed my TV last december, and I don't miss it much. Actually I don't miss it at all, as I'm having much more fun now than before. More time to read, more time to use my computer, more time outdoors, more time spent with friends... :-)

Re:Follow-through action

[MrResistor]

I don't boycott, but I do steal legally. I buy only used DVDs and CDs, and I get free passes to all the movies I see in the theater from my various friends who work there. I do have super basic $13/month cable, which I pretty much only use to watch the TV classes from the local Community College (they have a really great history teacher whose classes are broadcast. Even my 2-year-old is totally captivated by his lecture skills.)

Anyway, I guess my point is that you don't have to change your life that much in order to keep your money from going to these groups.

Re:Follow-through action

[Karellen]

I did boycott the movies.

After the Jon Johannsen (sp? - it's been a long time since I had to write it down) DeCSS arrests I went from going to the cinema 6(ish) times / month pre Feb 2000 to never in the period from Feb 2000 to Feb 2002.

After 2 years of not going to the cinema, and patiently explaining to my friends (a lot of whom are geeks and understand the issues) why they shouldn't, they all still were, and I kept reading movie reviews in other places where I figured there'd be some solidarity, and the evil movie corps weren't noticing my absence in the slightest.

So, what's the fucking point?

I didn't really miss the movies. But I did miss talking about them. Not being able to participate in the conversations about any movies that had come out recently was really starting to get to me. And there's only so many times you can say "But they're eeeviiil" before you start getting told to shut up (I did stop before then) and give it a break.

So, I've been back. I watch a few movies at the cinema now and again when some people are planning a big trip, and take part in the conversations again.

Still haven't bought any DVDs, but know the movie business doesn't give a shit about me and I'm not making a sod of difference.

Screw you all for supporting them with your dollars. You get what you deserve.

K.

Re:Follow-through action

[dr_l0v3]

There already. Missing none of it.

Re:Follow-through action

[Anonymous Coward]

been doing so for years. dont miss much. unlike the previous poster, my friends are understanding of my stance on the MPAA (many are involved with the film industry) but i am the only i know who does not see thier movies.

i doubt the MPAA cares about this one citizen they dont get to call a consumer, but at least i know im not any part of the problem. and yes, i am doing what i can to weaken thier power base (by supporting independant musicians and artist instead) as the others, i dont miss going to movies. and my friends dont talk about movies so much that i feel left out of conversation.

Although, how perfect is it?

[sterno]

The fact of the matter is that Bruce Perens is not about to get arrested for violating the DMCA. The movie studios have, if nothing else, demonstrated a strong grasp of how to construct an effective legal strategy around the DMCA. They could have gone after any number of folks for violating the DMCA, but instead they decided to take on 2600. Why? Not because they were the most egregious, but because they could drag a "hacker" into court and it would make their case easier.

Bruce Perens is a businessman, he has a strong reputation, and if he was taken to jail there'd be a huge uproar over it. When it got into court, the judge would be seeing a respected professional, not a hacker. That would hurt the case of the movie studios substantially and they know it.

Don't get me wrong here, I'm very glad to see Bruce and others in the industry standing up to this idiocy, but I think the notion that he might somehow go to jail is borderline absured. No, the movie studios would much rather build up a few precedents taking on the small fish.

What would impress me is if some major Linux distiribution would release a DVD player that was based on DeCSS code as part of their software. Now THAT would really be something.

Re:Although, how perfect is it?

[UVABlows]

["Bruce not getting arrested, courts don't like hackers"]

Well said, agreed.

No, the movie studios would much rather build up a few precedents taking on the small fish.

This is truly insightful.

What would impress me is if some major Linux distiribution would release a DVD player that was based on DeCSS code as part of their software. Now THAT would really be something.

I'm not so sure. For it to be something, these things would have to happen:
1) The studios would have to pursue the case. If they don't, then people watch DVDs in linux, no real harm done.
2) The case would have to get a decent amount of publicity. I can't see this happening, except if the distribution was redhat because they have a fair amount of repuation as a law-abiding, american corporation. But then again, I don't think redhat would put said reputation on the line. If it was any other distribution, I don't think the media would care much, most businessman have never heard of "SuSE" or "Mandrake".
3) The judge would have to decide in "our" favor. If s/he says "well, distributing DeCSS code is clearly illegal - you clearly broke the law," we're even more screwed because this is a decent-sized chunk of precedent.

Someone whose influence and recognition in the "real" world (ie, not the open source community) needs to do exactly what Bruce Perens is doing (he is educating, where DeCSS has already been labeled "illegal product" like heroin) and get a lot of media attention about it (ie "My name is Bill Clinton, there's a terrible law out there, I'm about to break it by educating you about how stupid the MPAA is... (education given) now they can arrest me for doing nothing that is morally wrong"). If the judge ruled against something like that, there WOULD be a terrible uproar.

Re:Although, how perfect is it?

[shotfeel]

Why would the studios have to pursue it? They have nothing to do with it. Its not like the authorities stopped pursuing Skylarov when Adobe stopped pursuing him.

What would happen with murder prosecutions if only the victim could press the case?

Re:Although, how perfect is it?

[UVABlows]

Its not like the authorities stopped pursuing Skylarov when Adobe stopped pursuing him.

Correct. But would the authorities have nabbed him in the first place if Adobe hadn't persuaded them to? No. The authorities don't want to look like puppets so they aren't going to (openly) do whatever a corporation tells them. But if Adobe had never tipped them off that he was breaking the law, they wouldn't have gotten him in the first place. Think of it in the context of trespassing. Trespassing IS criminal, but the cops aren't going to nail you unless someone complains.

Re:Although, how perfect is it?

[Dyolf Knip]

True, but it sounds like Perens is going to make a very big stink about this. If they don't do anything this time when it's blatantly public, they'll look even dumber trying to nab him for a similar act in the future and may continue to let it slide to avoid losing increasing quantities of face. And if the FBI or MPAA or whomever should eventually decide to pick a fight, he'll have this huge history of publicly, noisily, happily violating this very same law without the G-Men even giving it a second glance. The lower courts would probably convict him since they aren't really supposed to question the law, but the higher Appeals and the Supreme court would definitely want to know why it was ignored so much.

Oh well. Probably wishful thinking. It should prove to be a very interesting trial, if there is one.

Give 'em hell, Perens! [nt]

[Fortyseven]

Wewt. :)

DMCA in 1988, I though it was 1998

[Anonymous Coward]

No one was thinking about the millenium in 1988

Abortions and the DMCA

[roie_m]

I think the difference your teacher's case and this case is that while the pro-life/pro-choice issue is very well-known by the public, the public (that is to say, the non-/.-reading public) does not know about this issue. I think the idea is that once the public finds out about the issue, everyone will be against the DMCA (or certain aspects of it)

Best quote from article.

[Louis_Wu]

the controversial digital copyright legislation known as the 1988 Digital Millennium Copyright Act, or DMCA.

What year was that, again? :)

Civil Disobediance... for those of us in San Diego

[Etcetera]

What would you all recommend that attendees of the speech do if, for example, the feds come up on stage in the middle of it and attempt to publically arrest him?

With the proper notification of local media, having a large number of people get up on stage and surroung him (peacefully) to try to block the arrest would be very good publicitiy for the cause. The last thing the mainstream media would expect to see is a Berkeley or abortion clinic style incident and a technology convention, performed by a bunch of nerds.

"Near-riot Occurs at Programmer Convention"

YOU'RE A REBEL. NOW GO SHOWER, YOU DIRTY FOREIGNER

[Anonymous Coward]

Why I hacked my DVD player

[Anonymous Coward]

My wife speaks German and US DVDs only have English, Spanish, and sometimes French. So, until the MPAA includes German on US DVDs I will continue to get DVDs from Germany and play them on my hacked DVD player.

Re:Why I hacked my DVD player

[Anonymous Coward]

nazi lover

NOT A HACKER, BUT HE IS A DIRTY OPEN-SORES HIPPIE.

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh, I would.

[Anonymous Coward]

Aside from the fact that the DMCA affects me not in the slightest.

Seems to annoy thieves and morons who think that a computer monitor is 'killer' for watching movies on though. *snicker* Oh, wait a minute, that's right! It doesn't annoy them in the slightest - they shell out the cash to legally create software to play DVDs in computer drives.

Yeah, guess it just annoys the thieves, then.

Well, I did it...

[Tom7]

I did. http://www.andrew.cmu.edu/~twm/embed/dmca.html

Re:Well, I did it...

[NaDrew]

Your last update is dated May 7 2002. Has anything new happened since?

Re:Well, I did it...

[Tom7]

Nope. I think they've given up (but things happen really slowly in the legal world...)

Re:Well, I did it...

[Anonymous Coward]

Just thought I'd mention that last I checked, email was not a usab;e form of communication for delivering legal documents. In other words, until they send you an actual letter via the USPS or private courier, or call you on the phone, you've "officially" not been contacted. They're ynaking your chain, and they know it.

Also, do note that the email never actually stated that they would sue you - making a threat to sue with intent to intimidate is barratry, and the lawyer who does it would be subject to punishment that might include being disbarred.

disclaimer: I am not a lawyer

It is every moral persons duty...

[Snart Barfunz]

...to break unjust laws as often as possible, regardless of the consequences, until those laws become unenforceable and are repealed.

Re:It is every moral persons duty...

[lecter,hannibal_md]

... dont forget to write your local congressmen too... not that they will ever read it or anything...

Re:It is every moral persons duty...

[Martin Blank]

Write a letter (preferably reasonably polite, or at least respectful), sign it, put it in an envelope with your Congressperson's address on it, add a stamp to the envelope, and let the mailman deliver it for you. I've done this about a half-dozen times, and I've gotten four responses by mail that addresses the questions I had, as well as one form letter thanking me for sending my concerns in.

E-mail is almost certainly not read, at least in full. Snail mail is often read at least by a staffmember, and occasionally also by the addressee. It's worth a shot, and the effort one goes through shows that you're serious about it.

Re:It is every moral persons duty...

[markmoss]

That's changed. Now snail mail to anyone important goes through anthrax decontamination, and whatever other "security" they can think of before the staffers get it -- if it's still legible after all that, chances are they kept waiting for decontamination so long the bill in question is already passed, voted down, or mutated so you wouldn't recognize it.

I don't know if they read their e-mail or not, but at least they're not afraid it will kill them...

Re:It is every moral persons duty...

[chrisos]

I don't know if they read their e-mail or not, but at least they're not afraid it will kill them...

I think you forgot the word "yet" at the end of that sentence :)

Re:It is every moral persons duty...

[Requiem]

You know, people have been breaking every piracy law available for years and years, and it's easy given the proliferation of copying equipment. Photocopiers, CD burners, you name it. And yet, while almost unenforceable, those laws haven't been repealed, and I don't think they will, either.

Congress can't delegate power!

[raddan]

Maybe when Perens gets thrown in jail he can use this defense: Congress cannot delegate power to make laws.

The DMCA allows the producer of content to determine what rules apply to their creations- by the DMCA, these rules have the force of law, even if they impinge on fair use provisions.

In 1926, the Zenith Radio Corp. challenged the Secretary of Commerce over the legality of the Radio Act of 1912 which allowed the aforementioned Secretary to create rules regarding enforcement of the spectrum (12 F.2d 614). The court (District Court, N.D. Illinois, E.D.) ruled against the U.S., and although this was not a Supreme Court decision, Congress quickly responded by drafting new legislation that created the FCC.

Here are the relevant portions:

If section 2 is construed to give to the Secretary of Commerce power to restrict the operation of a station as the United States contends is done by this license, what is the test or standard established by Congress, by which the discretion of the Secretary is to be controlled? In other words, what rule has Congress laid down for his guidance in determining division of time between the defendant and the General Electric Company? U.S. v. Grimaud, 220 U.S. 506, 519, 31 S. Ct. 480, 55 L. Ed. 563; Union Bridge Co. v. U.S., 204 U.S. 364, 27 S. Ct. 367, 51 L. Ed. 523; Field v. Clark, 143 U.S. 649, 692, 12 S. Ct. 495, 36 L. Ed. 294. No language is more worthy of frequent and thoughtful consideration than these words of Mr. Justice Matthews, speaking for the Supreme Court in Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 118 U.S. 356, 369, 6 S. Ct. 1064, 1071 (30 L. Ed. 220):

"When we consider the nature and the theory of our institutions of government, the principles upon which they are supposed to rest, and review the history of their development, we are constrained to conclude that they do not mean to leave room for the play and action of purely personal and arbitrary power."

Congress cannot delegate its power to make a law, but it can make a law to delegate a power to determine some fact or state of facts upon which the law makes or intends to make its own action depend. Has Congress prescribed the rule or standard which is to control the Secretary of Commerce in the exercise of his discretion with the degree of certainty required in criminal statutes? It is axiomatic that statutes creating and defining crimes cannot be extended by intendment, and that no act, however wrongful, can be punished under such a statute, unless clearly within its terms. There can be no constructive offenses, and, before a man can be punished, his case must be plainly and unmistakably within the statute. U.S. v. Weitzel, 246 U.S. 533, 543, 38 S. Ct. 381, 62 L. Ed. 872; U.S. v. Harris, 177 U.S. 305, 310, 20 S. Ct. 609, 44 L. Ed. 780; Todd v. U.S., 158 U.S. 278, 282, 15 S. Ct. 889, 39 L. Ed. 982.

IMHO, this seems like a pretty good defense against the DMCA. Perhaps I am wrong?

Media Spin will distort the message

[MCRocker]

While I applaud Bruce's intentions, I doubt that what he's doing will be reported to the public in a way that helps the cause.

I'm sure the RIAA PR folks have already prepared the press release that most media will repeat verbatim when/if Bruce is arrested. The evening after the arrest, there will be a 15 second mention on the nightly news about some wacko, hacker or computer pirate being arrested. I'm afraid that the average person will have no idea what's really going on... especially since the supporters of the DMCA are the same people who control the media!

Setting precedent

[zauber]

At the very least, it puts the studios (etc.) in a more tenuous position when the prosecute the more "disheveled" hackers. Not sure about legally--i.e., equal protection under the law and the constitutionality of a restriction that is decided mostly by a prosecutor--but at least in terms of PR and argument, they will have to show clearly how what Perens did was different from what some lesser-known hacker does.

Re:Setting precedent

[shotfeel]

OK, I'm officially sounding like a broken record.

Studios don't prosecute (at least not yet). DA's prosecute. You can turn him in yourself, an official representative of the MPAA or RIAA doesn't have to be the one to do it.

Re:Setting precedent

[zauber]

Sorry, should have said "pursue." Corps don't procecute, but it is easy to forget this, given the influence they had on the creation of the DMCA and on identifying the targets for procecution and providing the evidence (!).

K-Mart doesn't procecute shoplifters either, but they do just about everything else to see that they are caught.

QuickVote: Will Bruce be arrested?

[xris]

Hi, i just wondered what the ./ crowd might think:

Do you think Bruce Perens will be legally charged for violating the DMCA when he performes his proposed actions at the O'Reilly Open Source Convention in San Diego?

So i've set up a quick vote script to gather your opinion:

Tell me me what you think!

To clarify things a bit: the question is not if he should be charged, but if you think he will be charged.

And hence...

[Andy Dodd]

This particular guard didn't have more pressing issues, since he was handling exports - Probably not too much illegal exporting into Mexico going on that takes priority.

Re:And hence...

[MrResistor]

Yeah, the US-Mexico border is probably one of the least secure in the world. Your friend should have tried that on an overseas flight, he probably would have gotten more of a response. Of course, he'd also have the expense of an overseas flight, which is considerably more, I suspect, than spending an afternoon in TJ...

I can help, but can't come

[Anonymous Coward]

I am on the wrong side of the country. However I will tell you what worked for me.

I started with Xine. They have various useful links. I needed the regionset utility, which you seem to have an alternate solution to. :-) From there I went to this foreign-hosted site from which you can get Xine in various forms. I had the best luck when I compiled everything from source. There are dependencies, so I had to compile in order. I forget which order, but I didn't have much trouble figuring it out, and you shouldn't either.

I will also send you a private email so that you can ask me any questions that come up. Its title will be "Followup to /. post" and the domain will be operamail.com.

There's no such thing

[avoisin]

As any good geek knows, there's no such thing as a white-collar prison resort.

If you get caught laundering money, you're not going to a white collar resort prison. No, no, no. You're going to a Federal pound me in the ass prison.

Small Potatoes

[Duck0987]

During the course of a speach I gave for a College class on the DMCA I preformed 3 violations of the DMCA. Making me eligable for something on the order of 1.5 Million dollars in fines and 15 years in prison.

Perhaps I should have annouced this to the world, I could have been newsworthy.

BTW I got an A on the speach.

User Friendly did this

[yerricde]

"It's fun to violate the D-M-C-A!"

Relevant User Friendly link (© 2002 Illiad)

Wrong: teaching how to do something is a service

[JoeBuck]

You are wrong in your claim that publishing a document on how to circumvent macrovision is exempt. If you sell the document, you are selling a service. Similarly, charging people money at a tech conference and teaching them at that conference how to circumvent copy protection is a service.

Of course, the fact that the DMCA in effect prohibits certain speech may be unconstitutional.

Great!

[Rogerborg]

Now I can use my CD-fixin' sharpie out "Dmitri Sklyarov" and scribble in "Bruce Perens" on my "Free..." t-shirt.

So Sorry.

[Anonymous Coward]

Already done these things.

But I would not do them for Bruce. Bruce is not an Open Source advocate...he's a Linux advocate. Go ahead, ask him about promoting BSD sometime.

Court Fight == Good?

[TibbonZero]

So perhaps a good court fight all the way to the top would be a good thing and kill the DMCA?

Re:Court Fight == Good?

[royalblue_tom]

Now you're getting it. And this may well be why a well known and respected member of the computing world is going to break the law openly, inviting just such a case.

Go Bruce!

Re:Civil Disobediance... for those of us in San Di

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd applaud the authorities. If you're going to stick your balls in a vice, you'd better not cry about it afterwards...

DMCA violation? How about the 1st amendment?

[zerofoo]

Amendment I.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

This clearly gives Bruce Perens and his audience the right to ASSEMBLE and DISCUSS any "grievances" they may have.

Congress may as well go piss on the graves of our founding fathers as they violate our bill of rights one by one.

-ted

Doesn't sound good..

[TibbonZero]

This just isn't good, not a good at all. Our country shouldn't be ran like this. The founders didn't want it to be this way.
I personally think that they American people will get so disgruntled that within 100 years the government will be forced a total overhaul by the people. I don't want to see it happen, but this stuff just keeps getting worse and worse.
Soon they will start really affecting our day to day lifes, instead of just screwing up our entertainment

Picking their battles...

[Danse]

Everyone remember Edward Felton? The Princeton professor that was being threatened by RIAA/SDMI? They threatened to prosecute him for a DMCA violation, but backed down because they knew it wasn't a strong enough case for them. They'd be suing a professor for giving a lecture in an academic setting. That wouldn't go over well, and could end up weakening their position significantly. These organizations know which battles they should be fighting. They've done a good job so far of picking only the ones they are likely to win. I doubt they will go after Perens. It's just too risky. Of course it will probably become obvious at some point that your social standing has a lot to do with what you can get away with. When some dirty hacker does the same thing Bruce does and gets arrested, we'll see that quite clearly.

Re:Picking their battles...

[Thing 1]

These organizations know which battles they should be fighting. They've done a good job so far of picking only the ones they are likely to win. I doubt they will go after Perens. It's just too risky.

I agree with you, but I don't think that's the point.

Bruce wants one of us to report him. To make sure that he is arrested as soon as he breaks the region-encoding. He needs to be arrested, and he's convinced that one of us will make the call.

At least that's what I hope. Sure, the enemy won't pull the trigger, but it'll have the same effect.

And when we call to report his crime, we can even pretend to be the enemy.

All's fair and all.

Re:Picking their battles...

[Zaak]

And here's your thirty pieces of silver.
Right this way to the Potter's Field.

Citizens arrest, anyone?

[shotfeel]

I've seen a lot of discussion on wether or not Perens will be arrested. If someone really wanted to bring this to a head, and if you're present and see him commit a crime, you have the right to perform a citizen's arrest. Let's make full use of our right while we still have them.

If there are plenty of witnesses who saw the crime committed (more than enough evidence to convict), I don't see how the DA could weasel out of prosecuting.

Re:Slashdot flaw: Funny interesting/insightful

[Anonymous Coward]

It probably has something to do with the need to laugh at the absurd.

Protest Permits

[Jon Howard]

On the subject of demonstrations and civil disobedience...

I've always found it funny that you have to get a permit to hold a protest in the US. Purportedly, this is to avoid undue inconvenience to those who are not taking-part in the protest - like rerouting traffic around the designated protest area - but isn't a protest supposed to be an inconvenience?

What's the point to giving-in to protesters if the protesters aren't affecting you adversely?

Re:Civil Disobediance... for those of us in San Di

[Ziviyr]

What would you all recommend that attendees of the speech do if, for example, the feds come up on stage in the middle of it and attempt to publically arrest him?

Start chanting DeCSS code. :-)

Mind the Sex Offense

[Jon Howard]

...but for Christ's sake, don't get caught taking a leak behind a tree off to the side of a road. Having your genitals exposed in public is enough to qualify you for Sex Offender status in many states.

Imagine having to go door to door and explain that you're a registered sex offender and how you really just took a leak behind a tree and it's no big deal... how many people would believe that coming from a known sex offender?

Of course, public breast-feeding is an upheld right for mothers in many areas... it's a "natural bodily function".

Re:Mind the Sex Offense

[Anonymous Coward]

Not a good objection. Breasts aren't genitals, and men are always allowed to reveal ours in public.

Re:Mind the Sex Offense

[Anonymous Coward]

If it gives me a woody, it's genitals ;)

There are indeed! But..

[Jon Howard]

Not for you and I. They're reserved for wealthy political prisoners.

Though I realize Perens is potentially turning himself into a prisoner for politics, the "club fed" style prisons are primarily for the international variety of political prisoners. And then, they're generally a form of house arrest, not a site with dozens of political prisoners bunking together.

Just what is needed!

[Anonymous Coward]

He will clearly be exercising his constitutionaly gauranteed right to free speech. The MPAA and RIA would be stupid to try and prosecute. It would go to the supreme court and then the DMCA would be toasted as it is clearly in violation of an amenment of the constitution.

Not Exactly

[PatientZero]

In Felton's case, they sent a letter ambiguously threatening legal action if he gave his presentation. He canceled his presentation, but after the conference they said that they hadn't threatened anything. They claimed to merely be warning him that someone view his actions as illegal under the DMCA.

It was worse, then, as they got their cake and ate it too: he didn't give the talk, and they didn't have to take him to court. Totally fscked up.

Boston Harbor?

[Bilbo]

So, when do we all get together and start throwing shipments of DVD's into the Boston Harbor??

Paint the world

[BoVLB]

What about if they paint the code?

That's an idea. Supposing we painted DeCSS (or some other DMCA violation) onto the side of a building (with the owner's permission, of course) together with an explanation of why the wall is now illegal. It would be sure to garner some media attention.

my email to hotline@mpaa.org

[timothy]

The MPAA has a special email address for reporting "piracy" -- though I don't know of any planned piracy, it seems like the place that they would like to be told about violations of the DMCA as well, so I sent them this note:

- - - -
Dear Sirs:

I work for Slashdot (http://slashdot.org), a Web site concerned
primarily with free software, electronic freedoms, computer hardware and
other things of interest to computer enthusiasts, as well as to those
generally interested in online freedom. The DMCA (and the MPAA's
involvement in that and similar laws) are frequent subjects of the
postings and discussion at Slashdot.

I guess that someone at the MPAA is aware of Bruce Perens' demonstration
Friday afternoon of (mostly trivial) circumvention techniques which allow
consumers to view DVDs in contravention of the Digital Milenium Copyright
Act. If not, here is a URL which links to both a discussion of this
planned demonstration and an Infoworld article on it; several of the
comments made in this discussion come from Mr. Perens himself. (The text
of this note will be posted to the discussion as well, and you are invited
to respond to it there, if you woud like.)

URL: http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/07/24/041525 6

Will the MPAA be pursuing action (filing a complaint) against Mr. Perens
for this public demonstration? If not, does this mean that other people
may also use similar techniques to enjoy their own DVDs without fear of
prosecution? I would also like to show people how to defeat annoying
region locks and encryption standards which make it dofficult to watch the
DVDs I have purchased.

I look forward to hearing from you; if the @hotline address is not the
right place to address this inquiry, I would appreciate hearing from you about where I should direct it instead.

Sincerely,

[signed, etc.]

Ya gotta pick your battles, pal.

[duck_prime]

Re:It is every moral persons duty...

...to break unjust laws as often as possible, regardless of the consequences, until those laws become unenforceable and are repealed.

What this is really about is trying to get content, which costs money to produce, for free. Not a great poster child for civil disobedience. I find it hard to imagine freedom of speech covers training people to pirate copyrighted content.

If you want a cause, forget this namby-pamby DMCA stuff. The real shuddering horror going on is the potential erosion of the 4th amendment, and due process in the war on terror. How many people are in jail and not even charged, much less convicted?

Plump geeks agonizing over their right to warez and MP3GZ in the face of this makes me sad.

Re:Ya gotta pick your battles, pal.

[chris_mahan]

Because there's a pile of gun-toting rednecks who are going to take up that battle a lot more efficiently that a bunch of sysadmins in the big room.

Remember Bush is from Texas. People in Texas understand the dynamics behind a population that has 4 times more guns than children.

Re:Ya gotta pick your battles, pal.

[ces]

The problem is the DCMA is a howlizer being used to kill a misquito. There are many legitimate uses of copy control curcumvention technologies such as watching anime DVD's that are never likely to be released in region 1, viewing DRM content on platforms other than Windows, playing content you purchased on devices of your choice, shifting the content to a more convienient format, archival copies, etc. Note that all of these uses, except for the copy control circumvention, perfectly legal under current law (Sony v. Universal, Home Recording Rights Act, etc.). Far more troubling to myself and others are the provisions of the DMCA that make it a crime to describe methods of copy control circumvention, this is what Mr. Perens is protesting. Under this portion of the DMCA if the RIAA were to come out with a new "super" DRM scheme that involved using ROT13 as the "encryption" scheme and you were to post this fact on bugtraq you could be sued or go to jail.

Break ROT13, go to jail!

Re:Ya gotta pick your battles, pal.

[Anonymous Coward]

[snip]

Quote "....that involved using ROT13 as the "encryption" scheme and you were to post this fact on bugtraq you could be sued or go to jail".

Then don't post it on bugtraq.. DUH.

Re:Ya gotta pick your battles, pal.

[DoctorFrog]

What this is really about is trying to get content, which costs money to produce, for free. Not a great poster child for civil disobedience. I find it hard to imagine freedom of speech covers training people to pirate copyrighted content.

RTFA. Mr. Perens purchased the DVDs in question.

Oh,

[TibbonZero]

I am stupid some days....
That really makes sense. BTW, if (when) the DMCA is destroyed, will those who have been wrongly charged (jailed, fined, loss of profits, etc..) be compensated?

Re:Oh,

[theFool]

You can't be convicted of a "crime" you commited that was legal at the time but has since been deemed illegal. (I believe this is called ex post facto), so why should it work the other way around? Someone could correct me...

No surprise. . .

[The Electric Messiah]

if he has an Apex. Quite a few of the Apex's can do PAL or NTSC. The one I have does both, and this is accomplished simply by hitting a few buttons on the remote. No firmware hack involved. The region encoding will require a firmware hack, but Apex firmware hacks are everywhere on the Net. I'd say there's a good chance Mr. Perens is going to use an Apex.

Re:Why is it (not) illegal?

[c13v3rm0nk3y]

I agree. However, this doesn't help you much when a cadre of lawyers with briefcases show up, frowning mightily.

The real question is, "has anyone successfully argued that standard EULA agreements on software are not contracts, and cannot be upheld if I decided to hack said software?"

I do not have an answer to this question. It's rather acedemic whether or not an end-user license or whatnot is a legal contract unless someone needs to challenge said "contract".

Many legal contraints can be placed upon individuals, whether or not they sign a formal contract.

[Offtopic] It's perfectly legal (in Canada) to make as many verbatim copies of any music production you legally own. Heck, it's a consumer right. That doesn't stop (US, Canadian, World) companies from restricting those rights whenever, and wherever, they can. Nobodies taken them to court and beat them soundly with a stout statute.

I'm not a lawyer, so I'm going to stop talking about the legalities now. My only point was that, under current conditions, it is trivial for a DVD manufacturer (&etc) to restrict almost any activity it deems unsavoury simply by invoking standard end-user agreements.

Last POST! -Yeah!

[Anonymous Coward]

Just thinking... Everytime a web page gets vandalized, instead of crappy graffitti, couldn't they start putting up DeCSS, etc, etc ????

Then who get's sued? --£åügHîñg Øüt £öüÐ

How about the audience?

[cureless]

Maybe Bruce can ask some of the audience if they want to participate. I don't know if this has other legal implications like conspiracy or something. It would be a stronger statement to see a group of people breaking the DMCA.

Just imagine, old respectable people, young workers, house dads/wifes, etc. It would be even be more interesting if he could get some "big" figures to back him up. Most big figures have ties with the industry, so it would be hard to see Celine Dion marking her own record. Maybe Ozzy or Marylin. Anybody have contacts with sports stars?
I guess it would also be neat to see some republicans/democrats/greens, etc doing it.

Another thing that is important is good media coverage.

I can't join you, but I'll contribute (the little that I have) to legal expenses.

cl

Another Prohibition?

[tuba_dude]

It looks to me like the 1920's again...Government cracking down on something that people enjoy because it's 'bad' and the people are rebelling in an odd manner. Interesting stuff. As I'm sure you all know, people back then would ignore the laws and make their own alcohol. While I'm not trying to compare this with alcohol, we still should do something like that. If more people like Mr. Perens pop up, there's obviously going to be more arrests, but eventually the FBI & Friends won't be able to keep up. Anybody know of conventions going on where fighting back would be appropriate?

Patents: Copy idea = yes Copy product = no

[Rares Marian]

Intellectual property law, which does not exist except the DMCA perhaps, bans innovation.

Patent law, trademark law, and copyright law, which do exist, allow an individual to have a hold on the market long enough to produce the product.

PTaC law have been perverted and marketted as IP law in an attempt to create IP law. Just because they call it doesn't make it so.

Status on Perens

[ebresie]

Just curious if there was someplace out there (maybe a web site) that had the status of this scenario...

Could anyone supply me with some DMCA infos for...

[Tarrek]

Hi. I have some connections to a reasonably large activist group in my region, with whom I used to broadcast pirate radio stuff. I'm flying clean and legal now, but would like very much to hook these people up with some information on the DMCA, and other "Tech injustices". The problem is, these are IN NO WAY computer people. Computers baffle them, and if they don't understand the issues, there's not going to be any way for them to fight the issues.

So, I was wondering if anyone had a link to a page, or a list of their own that might have a simple breakdown of exactly why the DMCA and similar laws are evil, and how one can go about participating in civil disobedience against them.

Thank you very much!

Why not just make uncoded DVDs?

[kcb93x]

Why doesn't some company or group of people begin manufacturing CD Roms, RWs and DVDs that don't have the region coding, and selling them in the US? If they're manufactured without the coding, then how could it be illegal? They wouldn't be 'removing' any DRM technologies, or whatever the MPAA and RIAA call it.

DCMA will die under it's own weight.

[Martin Marvinski]

History has shown time and again that restrictive systems fail. That is why communism, and all the other toltarian states eventually crumble. What will happen to the DMCA enabled systems is that they will get fewer and fewer buyers and supporters until their clout is diminished to the point that they can't fund the lobbyists anymore.
That is why Linux is such a success. Microsoft defeated every company that tried to make money selling software, and eventually they all died out. Linux is a prime example of evolution at it's best, because it doesn't need money and therefore cannot be killed. Microsoft will not be able to beat linux just in the same way that DCMA will eventually become so weak that it too will die under the *future* innovations.

My complaint to Sony

[alext]

Forgive the FU to my own post, but I've proudly become an activist and sent the following complaint to Sony (I actually bought a Vaio and had to take the thing back because a) it was ugly and b) the region protection couldn't be cracked).

This is a slightly different take on the region-coding problem, and possibly one that might be easier to make progress on:

On reading the product description (below) of the Sony VX71P laptop computer, I am given the clear impression that this product is designed for users who travel internationally and that its major features will function in multiple countries. However, on enquiring further I have been told that the DVD disk player hardware in this model has been deliberately and explicitly prevented from playing DVD disks from more than one country, if that country is in a different region and if the disk is region-coded, as most disks are. For example, I cannot set the device to play both a DVD disk I buy or rent while in the UK and one which I buy or rent while in the USA.

I therefore consider this product description seriously misleading and therefore illegal under the UK Trade Descriptions Act, 1968 (False Trade Description clause).

Also, I suggest that any similar product descriptions applying to portable equipment offered by Sony and capable of playing DVDs are also illegal under the Act.

I request that you amend all product descriptions available to or intended for the UK market to avoid any suggestion that DVD player functionality is supported in multiple regions.

I look forward to your prompt attention to this matter, and would appreciate written notice of how you intend to comply with the TDA via email or by post.

If I receive no satisfactory response to this request in 21 days (by 14 August 2002) I will send it to your registered office in the UK. If after this I receive no satisfactory response I will lodge a complaint with my local trading standards office and ensure that the matter receives the widest possible publicity.

The text of the VX71P product description follows:

"Set your own limits.

When you want to take on the world, you need a notebook which can meet every challenge all the time. Ultra-portable with an unrivalled battery life and a 14.1" screen, the VAIO VX71P is the perfect stylish go-getter to help you push boundaries wherever you are.

* Crystal clear 14.1" display
* Extra-long battery life up to 4h 20min
* Ultra-portable, slim-size notebook: weight 2kg
* Controls the ultimate power/performance balance with high-end battery and low-voltage components
* Burn CDs on the road with the included mobile i.LINKTM DVD/CDRW drive
* Wide range of VAIO software pre-installed for video and audio applications"

Re:My complaint to Sony

[BollocksToThis]

Do you have a webpage you will be posting followup information on?

I'd like to see any response Sony has to this.

Re:My complaint to Sony

[markmoss]

Alext: Please keep us posted on how this thing with Sony goes. Does this mean the UK has consumer protection laws that actually require the product to do what it's advertised to do?

Re:My complaint to Sony

[alext]

Sure - I'll put an entry to a homepage in my /. details by the weekend, just need to get my ISP to create the domain name.

Well, yes, stuff must behave as advertised, definitely - isn't that common practice these days? Otherwise those Medicine Roadshow guys would still be around... Here's a summary of the UK Trades Descriptions Act anyway - an easy read, surprisingly.

Re:My complaint to Sony

[alext]

Coming up, promise - check my /. bio on Saturday and there should be a pointer. Fingers crossed eh?

Re:My complaint to Sony

[markmoss]

stuff must behave as advertised, definitely - isn't that common practice these days?

It doesn't seem to be on this side of the pond. For instance, Microsoft's ads attribute great stability and security to their server OS's, but if you sue them for your losses because the OS is unstable and insecure, they will point at the EULA's which basically say they are responsible only for stamping the binary code into the CD... There are laws in most states to the effect that an automobile, for instance, has to do what you'd normally expect an automobile to do in reasonable safety - so, for instance, no amount of fine print in the warranty can prevent Ford & Firestone for liability for blown tires and rollovers, if it's proven that their design or manufacturing was at fault. However, I don't think Ford would get in trouble for advertising suggesting that the Explorer was suitable for things beyond the normal expectations of automobiles (an Antarctic expedition, say), when it wasn't. In fact, there are many ads showing SUV's in rugged outdoor terrain where only Jeeps, Land Rovers, and mules actually go, and I'm not sure the new (Daimler-Chrysler) Jeeps would hold up. No mention of special training in driving that sort of terrain, tools and spare parts, jerrycans of extra gas, or any of the other things you'd better take or you'll be walking back.

In software there is no such common understanding of how well it ought to work, and the US courts take the legalese in the EULA (which is basically written to be not understood, and displayed so as to minimize the chance someone will really read it) as binding, rather than the ads the buyer definitely saw and understood. Damn. Government of the sheeple, by the corrupt, for the corporations.

Re:My complaint to Sony

[markmoss]

I didn't proofread enough. For "prevent Ford & Firestone for liability", read "excuse Ford & Firestone from liability".

why not all be disobedient

[Anonymous Coward]

If the marker trick actually works, wouldn't selling out or giving away markers constitute a violation of the DMCA??? If it enables you to circumvent the encryption/copy protection is it not illegal to traffic in it? Why don't we all go to retailers that sell DVDs and give out markers on the same day???

DVD access controls

[arbofnot]

DVDs have 3 levels of access control in some sense:

1. CSS encryption

It's been ruled that this is an access control covered by the DMCA. However, not all DVDs are encrypted. DVDs that have some data encrypted do not always have all data encrypted. Perens could use an unencrypted DVD for his demo to bypass the CSS issue.

2. Region code

It still seems to be an open question whether region code is an access control covered by the DMCA.

3. Video standard

The USA, Japan, and much of Asia use NTSC. Other areas like Europe and Australia use PAL.

Some region-free or multi-region players will output NTSC for an NTSC disc, and PAL for a PAL disc. It is necessary to convert between video standards if the display cannot handle the video standard. Some players can also convert PAL discs for NTSC displays, and NTSC discs for PAL displays.

I would be completely astonished if video standard were considered an access control.

Assume for a moment that a disc has no region code, and you want to play it in a region 1 player. One player I own will refuse to play a PAL disc with no region, reporting it cannot play this type of disc. Since almost all displays in region 1 cannot handle a PAL signal, that restriction in the player makes some amount of sense. ("I tried to play this DVD and all it does is show a stretched out black&white picture!!!")

Say for a moment that a disc is from region 3, with NTSC video and no encryption. The only thing to restrict playing the disc in the USA is the region code. The big question now is whether the region code is "a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under [the DMCA]", and whether instructions for how to play the disc are:

traffic[king] in any technology, product, service, device, component, or part thereof, that -

* (A) is primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under [the DMCA];

* (B) has only limited commercially significant purpose or use other than to circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under [the DMCA]; or

* (C) is marketed by that person or another acting in concert with that person with that person's knowledge for use in circumventing a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under [the DMCA].

./ subscription option: support free speech for $1

[klparrot]

Maybe /. should add an option to their subscriptions to funnel a buck or two each month toward a fund to lobby congress, donate to politicians who support our views, and bail people like Bruce and Dmitry out when they get in trouble. We could decide where the money goes by taking a vote, where 1 karma point gets 1 vote (meritocracy is generally preferable to democracy).

Writing to Congress

[ces]

Most members of Congress seem to be asking that snail mail be sent to their local district offices instead of their offices in DC. Most of them suggest Phone calls, FAXes, and email as an alternative to snail mail.

Perens needs to go to DefCon.

[hearingaid]

Assuming he's not busted this time; he should go to DefCon or another blackhat-ish conference and give a talk.

That'll get out of the "other specialists in the field" category, and might make him look like enough of a target.

It would also nail home the point: Hackers, phreaks and so on are researchers. Some of them are pretty lame, but so are many undergraduates and professors talk to them all the time.

I blame tho Mayflower.

[Inoshiro]

People come to North America to escape what they felt as the repressive nature of Europe. Their hard-line religous stance was being booed. So what happens in North America? The Religous Right becomes the new standard of oppresive regimes.

Any time a despot is replaced or removed, a new one takes its place. Look at the French Revolution.

Re:I blame tho Mayflower.

[Jon Howard]

Two words: "power vacuum".

If there isn't an agent controlling an interaction (be it by law or force), someone else will step up to it. It happens, we need both fewer and stronger laws. It's harder to see and fight asymettry in the legal system when it's as large and complex as ours. Balance is the only thing that effectively shields us from this type of aggression.

Shameless counter-plug...

[bevonovo]

http://conferences.oreillynet.com/cs/os2002/view/e _sess/2538

After Bruce breaks the DCMA, drop by understand a new module for making Open Source a successful business module...

Definition of "trafficking" flawed??

[Reziac]

I'm wondering if in the eyes of the law, "providing a route to" (your 2600's hyperlinks example) is "trafficking" whereas "telling someone how to do it" is merely free speech.

If so, then telling someone where to find a drug dealer would be trafficking (has anyone ever been prosecuted for this sort of "trafficking?), while telling them how to make their own drugs would not be.

The logic process is the same, and equally flawed.

It is every moral juror's duty...

[Bob_Robertson]

...to aquit anyone charged with violating an absurd, unjust, or unjustly applied law.

REGARDLESS of whether or not the individual did, knowingly or not, break the law.

http://www.fija.org/

Bob-

You can't pick you battles.

[Inoshiro]

Either everyone resists an unjust law, or the unjust law stands.

Have you seen Gandhi?

Yeah, you get thrown in jail. That happens when you're involved in an unjust system. Should I be arrested for walking on the sidewalk while black? Should I be arrested for listening to my music from a CDR instead of the CD master copy?

No. But you'll be thrown in jail until you can attract enough attention to the problem. Even then, you will still be thrown in jail. However, by doing this and publicising it, you educate the public about the system. If Bruce Perens does this, geeks will know and care. If YOU are thrown in jail, and more like you are thrown in jail, and you explain this to the media, average people will know and care.

The difference? A law standing or a law falling.

Re:You can't pick you battles.

[UVABlows]

Either everyone resists an unjust law, or the unjust law stands.

Agreed! The problem is not everyone knows or cares about the DMCA. Manual laborers who work 40 hours a week, sleep 49 hours a week and get pissed the other 79 hours just don't care. And nothing will make them care. I'm not sure, but if you meant "everyone who cares about the unjust law" by "everyone", even if everyone does resist this law, we still wouldn't have enough people. (See this post of mine elsewhere in the thread).

Have you seen Gandhi [imdb.com]?

No. I read up a bit on it (his movement) just now, nothing too detailed. How close to the real story is the movie?

However, by doing this and publicising it, you educate the public about the system.

Here's where our views differ. Even if we got the publicity that we think is needed, like front page of the chicago tribune, I don't think the average american will care. "Computer people" are seen by the public as arrogant. In general, they think we think we're better than them. This movement would get no sympathy from the public, sympathy which is necessary to scare lawmakers into giving in. Gandhi and MLK got that sympathy.

Re:You can't pick you battles.

[Inoshiro]

The movie Gandhi is very accurate. In fact, it's a video biography by another name. Ben Kingsley does an amazing Gandhi. It was used for my high school 20th century history class, in addition to the books.

Now, for the media coverage, don't push the computer angle. Push the usage angle. Always talk about fair use, the ability to watch things how YOU want to watch them -- once you've paid for them. If you always emphasize that you paid for it and were just using how you wanted, the average joe will sympathize. They like their VCRs and DVDs, but they don't like how DVDs won't let them skip FBI warnings (I think those are stupid, if I ever touched the internals of a DVD player program, I'd have it automatically skip segments which disable navigation controls).

Gandhi didn't get sympathy, he inspired. MLK did not get sympathy, he inspired. Mother Teresa inspired. If you want to win this, you must inspire people to see things differently. It can be hard, and it can be lonely, but it is a power which can move any mountain.