Slashdot Mirror
Fritz's Hit List
wwwssabbsdotcom was one of several to submit news stories about Ed Felten's latest venture: Fritz's Hit List, a list of electronic devices with some sort of digital storage and processing capabilities sufficient to qualify them "digital media devices" under Sen. Hollings' CBDTPA bill.
Today on Fritz's Hit List: Big Mouth Billy Bass.
That's right, your favorite wall-hanging, singing, dancing, animatronic fish qualifies for regulation as a "digital media device" under the Hollings CBDTPA. If the CBDTPA passes, any new Billy Bass will have to incorporate government-approved copy protection technology.
Fight piracy -- regulate singing fish novelties!
I thought the CDBPABST was supposed to be a bad law. How can anything that aims to regulate the proliferation of Singing Billy Bass be evil?
I love you, Fritz Hollings!
The next Slashdot story will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush and slashdot the links early!
Fritz Hit List #8
Those voice-boxes for throat-cancer patients that enable them to speak with a deep voice will now need to protected with government approved anti-copright protection.
Fight Piracy = Regulate deep throating devices!
Tournament Management Online &
You're right. They forgot the gigantic dollar sign in the middle.
(Note to mods: Yes I know that it's supposed to start with a red stripe at the top.)
Makes sense, if not in this light.
After all, imported robot pets are finding employment without green cards and taking rewarding pet jobs away from more expensive to maintain domestic alternatives.
You laugh now, but when that little robotic R2-D2 takes your waitressing job because he's willing to work for less than minimum wage, you'll change your tunes!
I'm sure there's a Slashdot article around here somewhere about hacking your "Billy Bass" to record and playback MP3s. You should try it. The sound quality is incredible.
It's too bad that more of the public is clueless on measures such as this. Maybe if we portray the CBDTPA as an Government mandated tax for the entertainment industry on many common electronic goods. The DRM hardware cost is borne by anyone who uses computer or consumer electronics, but all it really protects is the entertainment industry. Contrast that to many other government regulations, which impose costs on businesses, but generally to help protect the public.
I looked at the RIAA's web site, and listened to all the soundbites from Jack Valenti, Sen. Hollings and Hilary Rosen, and I agree.
"Piracy is theft"
Downloading a song from the internet is every bit as bad as stealing a CD from a shop. I didn't realise this. I was stealing music all this time
Now then, if I had come across several CDs that I didn't own, and I knew who their owner was, I would take some efforts to return them.
Now, I have several gigabytes of stolen mp3s. I think I should return them to their rightful owner. To whom do I email them?
I'll bet you were. That's a pretty small icon to notice it, but there it is. There's not 50 stars on it. I'll be damned. ;)
Just kidding, I know you're talking about the stripes.
Machine: You had 3 messages. 1 Message deleted automatically since it has copyrighted material.
User: Oh no, Grandma again left a message with her radio on in the background.
Is that when you consider the amount of idiotic lawsuits over laws that can be broadly interpreted... that some of these common devices might very well indeed end up under fire
Politicians seem to spend a lot of time patching up too-broad laws that don't meet their expectations, and an equal amount of time making silly new too-broad laws.
That's right, your favorite wall-hanging, singing, dancing, animatronic fish qualifies for regulation as a "digital media device" under the Hollings CBDTPA. If the CBDTPA passes, any new Billy Bass will have to incorporate government-approved copy protection technology.
Well this just goes to prove that there's a bright side to every dark law.
I have no special gift, I am only passionately curious. --Albert Einstein
Ok, so many of these items seem ridiculous when you consider them to be potential "digital piracy" devices. But what if the CBDPBPDBPPTA (whatever) does pass?
Can't you imagine the Slashdot headlines?
Store audio files with Barbie
from the we're-very-desperate-now dept.
Digital Music Lover writes: "Now that the CPTBPTPBTPBA has passed, mainstream digital music recording has come to a complete halt. Music lovers now have to pay every time they want to listen to a recording on their Fritz/Palladium enabled PC's, and they can't record that music for later use. However, some clever hackers in Germany figured out a way around this problem. They modified a 'Barbie talking cash register' with some custom DSP chips and an Ethernet interface. Now instead of ringing up the price of a loaf of bread, Barbie plays the latest Metallica recording instead!
It is my hope and prayer that we never get to this point. But if the Pigopolists do prevail, I can definitely see the hacker community desperately trying to store digital music any way they can.
Tired of FB/Google censorship? Visit UNCENSORED!
Felten's list gives the impression that it's the crazy interpretations of CBDTPA we have to fear.
But the real problem is that CBDTPA is a crazy bill to begin with. You can't fix something like this by giving back the singing fish. If every single one of Felten's examples were exempted from the bill, what's left would be no less outrageous.
First they first came for the Billy Bass and I didn't speak up because I hated Billy Bass.
Then they came for the Spam and I didn't speak up because I hated Spam.
They came for the browser mods that pop up ads depending on my site visits, and I didn't speak up because I hated Gator.
Then they came for my TiVo, and they had to pry it out of my cold, dead hand.
[With apologies to Pastor Martin Niemoller]
Actually, I think this hit list is totally stupid. Half the things on that list wouldn't fall under the law.
Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
"When will it end?"
When people in general begin to become aware of the encroachment of tyranny, and when it becomes unbearable enough to sacrifice comfort in pursuit of liberty.
Not before then.
-fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
Hmm... US government puts out bill to require anything digital to have copy protection on it... cost for digital equipment goes up.
Last month, US government drives legislation to force all TVs' to have digital tuners installed, including all TVs' manufactured in the US, and all being shipped via the US. Cost for TVs' and consumer electronics goes up.
US government also tables legislation requiring all television networks to convert to digital within 5 years. All existing TVs' and VCRs' will be obsolete. Cost to consumers goes up.
Result: In 5 years, all televisions and VCRs are digital, copy-protected, and controlled. Government gets to dole out the new "digital" channels to whomever meets their standards.... or should that be 'ideals'?
Earlier in the year (and the year before, and the year before) the US government threatens to put stricter regulations on the Internet, including what you can do, what you can read, and where you can read it. Stocks of net-filtering software go up, ad banners start to reduce fees paid because of declining revenue, free-speech sites and those not funded by a corporation start going away.
Earlier this year, US government tries to force libraries to filter the websites available on their public computers. US government also successfully forces schools to filter content. Those who do the filtering? Corporations who use their own judgement to determine if a site should be filtered or not.
DMCA serves as pretense to shut down P2P networks, mp3/warez websites, Instant Messangers with file sharing capabilities (it's coming, just you watch) etc.
"THE WAR ON TERRORISM" (tm) serves as pretense to search anyone, anywhere, even from outside the country.
US government arrests people that it invites into the country (the two russian credit card hackers and the FBI) or those that haven't even done anything to the US (Skylarov ((SP?)))
You know, I saw a sig that said "Canada: It's like being in the loft above a really great party". I don't know about you, but I'm starting to think that not all the noise from the party downstairs is good.
And, on a different note, as IANAL (sorry, everytime I see that I read I-anal. I just can't write it with a straight face), what happens if I come down to visit with my Sony minidisc player? Do I get arrested for having non-conforming hardware? Technically, this could extend to anything with a memory, including a watch, a car, a phone.... sound worrisome?
You know, I started this post out noting increased costs... then I got to noting the decreased liberties... then I started thinking "Yanno? If I were slightly more paranoid, I'd almost think that the US government is trying to discourage free speech and push internet and technology access up to the higher tax brackets, where they have more control, while removing these tools for freedom from the 'unwashed masses'. But that would be a bad thought, and I'm double-plus good!"
And, if you think I'm kidding, take any of the paragraphs up above and look in slashdot archives... they all came from here.
"If you don't think, you're letting the terrorists win!"
If I knew the wedgies I gave you back in 6th grade would have resulted in this . . . I might have taken a moments pause.
Because, of course, you're the resident expert on the law. Perhaps some concrete citations of WHY you believe they wouldn't fall under the law might help boost your credibility....
7 November 2006: The day Americans realized corruption and incompetence weren't addressing 11 September 2001
Nope, no sig
Fascism starts when the efficiency of the government becomes more important than the rights of the people.
Those greeting cards that let you record a personal greeting to be played back to the recipient when they open the card.
"Sorry mom, I wanted to get you a personalized greeting card but the DRM chip added $25 to the cost of the card."
If this passes, and HDTV sales don't pick up, what's next? Passing a law that makes it mandatory for every American to buy at least one $2000 HDTV set?
What? You mean it's already happened? Arrgh!!!
All this means is that software and hardware development move out of the US, and what we get will be the dumbed down versions that companies think people will buy in the US despite the added expense and reduced functionality incorporating DRM will mean. However, this isn't a big deal because in a post-CBDTPA economy, those of us who stick around will be too busy looking for work to buy toys... and new computers and too broke to afford them.
Why are the vendors still playing "deer in the headlights" about this? Do they figure it's cheaper to move out of the US than fight?
Why hasn't a real PAC been put together by the high-tech rank and file to save our jobs? (hint: GeekPAC is a joke, a "political organization" that can't put together a decent website together isn't going to rise up and take Congress back)
Note that the industries affected are 10x the size of Hollywood in terms of income. So why is the tail wagging the dog?
Tech Public Policy stuff
Reported contributions list
Top 3 Industries (PACs and Individuals):
1 Lawyers/Law Firms $1,463,550
2 Communications & Electronics $698,958
PAC Contributors:
Walt Disney Co $6,000
AOL Time Warner $5,083
National Assn of Broadcasters $5,000
Comcast Corp $2,500
Motion Picture Assn of America $3,000
ASCAP $1,000
Cablevision Systems $1,000
Charter Communications $1,000
Sony Pictures Entertainment $1,000
Universal Studios $1,000
Viacom Inc $2,000
3 Financial & Investment $404,349
Additional PAC contributions here.
Personal Finances are here.
Others who sit on the Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee.
If you think he's bad, check out Boxer.
notice how almost every message moderated above 3 in this thread is "Funny" - that probably says something... I'm too lazy to figure out what, though.
sic transit gloria mundi
As an EE student, I have to say that I love this idea! If this bill ever passed, it would make my job VERY hard. Just consider the following example:
Sure it may be easy to compute fourier transforms (or whatever) in realtime for a 44KHz singal, checking for some sort of watermark, but what about high bitrate systems? A 96KHz 24bit 6 channel stream of audio amounts to 13.8 Mbits/sec of data. A computer to check all that data in for copyright infringement in realtime is going to be pretty expensive. What if all I'm asking is a digital delay box for that data? All I'd nomrally need inside the box is some RAM and something to read and write to that RAM. Now that all of a sudden, I need to do real computation on that data the cost of my device would skyrocket. It might suddenly become cheaper to get 1ms of delay, by using 100' of wire than by doing it in the digital domain!
What about Digital Storage Oscilloscopes? Does a 1GHz DSO have to check all that data (A ton of data, even if it doesn't caputre at that rate continuously) before letting me download it to a PC? I could easily hook that oscilloscope up to the output of a protected device and caputure the signal.
What about FPGAs? Are they goiung to be regulated devices? Right now one could co nnect one to the coax SPDIF out on their DVD Player and program it to run an FIR filter to remove the watermark. It would be pretty much impossible to make it so that I couldn't program it to filter a watermark and still have it be a useful device.
Last week, I had a pretty interesting discussion with on eof the professors for a DSP course I'm taking, just talking about all the stupid thing that hollywood was tried to get pused through. They actually tried to get a law passed so that your audio device would not copy music if it contained a certain frequency! Not even a combination of frequerncies, but one single frequency! A single distorted guitar, would probably be enough to set that off!
Hopefully certain companies (TI for instance makes audio ICs, and DSP chips, but doesn't own a record label.) understand how much this law would increase their costs and get it killed, fast.
Life is too short to proofread.
"There is a demand problem."
So now what? You have to legislate demand? That sounds like something out of the 1930s Soviet 5-year plans. It doesn't matter if it is a good product or you don't need it, you have to buy it because the law requires a certain level of demand.
You cannot legislate demand (not in a free society, anyways).
I know that they are trying to spin it so that "if content were available, people would buy the complementary goods", however, the goods/services are not necessarily complementary. I can rent high-quality videos from the local video store. And I can make full use of the internet without ever watching video streams or downloading videos. I don't need broadband to watch Hollywood movies.
There is no strong correlation between broadband subscriptions and consumption of Hollywood content.
The significant problems we face cannot be solved by the same level of thinking that created them. -Einstein
Even so, they can have my DNA Polymerase when they extract it from my cold, dead fingers (and arms, blood, liver, etc.)
Sig:Why copyright isn't a fundamental human right
I have seen some of those on the American stations we get here in Canada. Are they funded by the government or are they funded by a public interest group? If they are funded by the government, can you say "nineteen eighty-four"? That would be too double-speak for me.
Buying a Dell computer is equivalent to dropping the soap in a prison shower.
It strikes me that most of the arguments against the CDBTPA I see posted on /. are purely logistical in nature. They run along the lines of, "If this is passed, such and such(billy bass) would be illegal, now wouldn't that be stupid." or, "If you implement this in devices, it will have these bad consequences(can't film kids in front of coke machine, etc)."
./ers still wouldn't like it.
I've yet to see a really good argument that attacks the basis for the CDBTPA, rather than just saying why it won't work. And yet I get the impression that even if it was implemented in a non-intrusive, practical manner,
So why not argue against the ideals behind the bill? Rather than just saying it's a bad bill?
Or, if the actual ideas behind the the CDBTPA are sound, why not try to find a good way to implement it?
What's in a Sig?
between digital media devices and guns.
After all, guns have decent, law abiding uses like hunting, self defense, target shooting, collectables, and such.
Clearly digital media devices also have many law abiding uses.
Guns also have illegal uses, and let's face it, those illegal uses are FAR worse than any illegal uses of digital media devices. At least abuse of digital devices doesn't kill.
Therefore, if Fritz is to get his way, there is a clear parallel to place 'access restraint' devices in every marketed gun. Enlist the NRA to help fight our battle.
I know this is silly. But I'm not sure I know what's wrong with the reasoning, at least until I get to the prior paragraph.
In a much more meaningful sense...
I work in the electronics field. My employer has had rounds of layoffs in the past year, as have others. Our state has been badly hurt. IMHO the stuff Hollings is trying to push through will hurt the tech industry, badly. One of my Senators (Leahy) has been in Hollywood's pocket in the past. He needs to understand that this will hurt our state if this nonsense gets put into law.
I wish I knew what was the most effective way to communicate. In the past, I guess the phone has gotten the most specific response, even better than a letter delivered directly to his office in town.
The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
The actual part of the bill that is being attacked here is down in the definitions:
(3) DIGITAL MEDIA DEVICE. -- The term "digital media device" means any hardware or software that --
(A) reproduces copyrighted works in digital form;
(B) converts copyrighted works in digital form into a form whereby the images and sounds are visible or audible; or
(C) retrieves or accesses copyrighted works in digital form and transfers or makes available for transfer such works to hardware or software described in subparagraph (B).
As I highlighted, B is the offending line. Consider - those buttons that are sewn into stuffed animals that play music when pressed? Those match the definition in (B).
But this is not the only technical offender. A digital camera can easily be in violation (see part (A) of the definition, then take a picture of a billboard). More significantly, the Internet itself is probably a definition (C) product - certainly, a modem, LAN card, or disk drive is (load a document, or display a web site).
Unfortunately, this definition is, at heart, flawed - way too broad, and way too inclusive.
We are the Music Makers, and We are the Dreamers of Dreams...
The advertisements are part of a series called "Campaign for Freedom", they are funded by the The Advertising Council.
The ads are a continuation of the Ad Council's September 11th PSAs.
From the Ad Council's September 11th page:
On September 11th, America was shattered by acts of terrorism. Our nation, our citizens, and the belief system upon which our country was founded were shaken.
The Ad Council returned to its wartime footing, developing messages that would help Americans remain strong throughout the war on terrorism, just as it had during World War II. Public service messages to help the country respond and recover from the attacks were also developed. The first PSA began running just 10 days after the attacks.
Early PSAs like "I am an American" celebrated the country's extraordinary diversity and reminded people of the values that make America so unique. Other early PSAs included Laura Bush encouraging parents to talk to their kids, and others emphasizing tolerance and the importance of going on with our lives by "Living Brave."
A short time later, the Ad Council announced its "Campaign for Freedom," an initiative developed on behalf of the entire advertising industry. This important campaign was designed to inform, involve, and inspire Americans to participate in activities that will strengthen our nation and help support the war on terrorism.
From the Ad Council's "Campaign for Freedom" page:
Developed following the tragedies of September 11th, the Ad Council's Campaign for Freedom is an unprecedented volunteer effort from the advertising industry. The initiative is designed to assist Americans during the war on terrorism through the development of timely and relevant PSAs. This first round of PSAs has been created to celebrate our nation's freedom and remind Americans about the importance of freedom and the need to protect it for future generations. According to research, Americans are looking for messages that will inform, involve and inspire them during the war on terrorism. This inspirational campaign is advertising's gift to America. All of the ads conclude with the powerful tagline, "Freedom. Appreciate it. Cherish it. Protect it."
Happy Fun Ball is for external use only.
2) stick tongue out
3) close lips lightly over tongue
4) exhale
Eternity: will that be smoking, or non-smoking? I Corinthians 6:9-10