Slashdot Mirror
Lofgren's Anti-DRM Bill
blastedtokyo writes "House representative Zoe Lofgren introduced the Digital Choice and Freedom Act. Perhaps the most interesting section is the part that invalidates 'non-negotiable shrink wrap licenses' (EULAs) that limit rights. On top of this, it states that both digital and analog media need to be subject to fair use rules for backing up. The full text of the bill is also available." News.com.com.com.com and Infoworld have stories as well, which both note that there is no chance of these bills being passed this year.
All together now...Repeat. However this is such great news, I don't mind hearing about it twice. Let's hope that at the very least this bill stirs up more media attention to the DMCA, DRM, and other things that are designed to take away our rights, not protect them.
"I may be quite wrong." - Socrates
Checks and balances. 1) while the administratorn (President) can submit a Bill they can not Pass a bill into law, that is the job of Congress. 2) while congress can pass any bill they want the administration can veto it, thereby requireing 2/3 of congress to overcome the veto. 3) meanwhile our life term judges (appointed by the administration, and approved by congress, but who will outlast them all.. ok except strom thurman) can declare a law unconstitutional forcing congress to change the constitution to pass it. so you have people of 2 & 6 year terms making laws, a person with a 4 year term (limited to 2 terms) with veto power, and life term judges making sure the law is constitutional. Its a really clean system, if more americans voted ( and did not just vote the party line ) it would actually work.
Most of the provisions in Rep. Lofgren's bill that conflict with existing laws are edits or clarifications -- they replace or qualify previous statements, but they don't contradict them outright. For example, it would still be illegal to distribute circumvention devices, unless they're required (no other easy way to get fair use exists) and marketed as fair-use devices. That is, cable descramblers sold as "ADV: GET FREE CABLE!!" are still illegal. Signal descramblers sold as "Tivo digital adapter" would now be OK.
Conflicts with proposed legislation are quite common. What gets passed, if anything, will be a compromise between the Lofgren bill and Sen Holling's "government-mandated DRM in all electronics" bill.
That's fine if you can read the agreement before buying the product. The problem with shrinkwraps is that you often can't. You buy the nice looking box at the store, get it home, open it up and there's some sticker saying you have to take it back to the store for a refund if you don't agree. That's too much of a pain. If you want the agreement to be really binding (and I tend to agree that manufacturers should be able to put whatever terms in they want) you have to be open and make sure those terms are publicised alongside the marketing material.
---- Den ene knappen er powerknapp, den andre er Bender voice knapp "Bite My Shiny Metal Ass"
The issue is not that the RIAA is trying to DRM all of their products, the issue is that the RIAA is trying to legislatively force EVERYONE to DRM-cripple their products.
retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
As a software developer, I'd like to see EULA's remain legal. I don't want to be sued because some idiot misused or ran a virus infected version of my executable and bad things happened to that PC. I don't want to be sued when the same idiot installs an older software application that overwrites a bunch of MFC and ATL DLL's and then complains that "it dunnit work no more - yee haw"
However, I'm completely opposed to the way EULA's are presented to people now... Most EULA's are presented as a step in the InstallShield installer, if you don't accept the terms you can't install the application. Problem is, if you don't accept the terms, you won't be able to take it back to the store. Best Buy, Fry's, Comp USA, etc., don't take returns on opened software, only exchanges.
What should happen is that companies are required to either print the EULA on the box (there is room, even on the new boxes, just print it on the large flap where there's just screenshots and marketing crap there anyways). Then, users can read the EULA before they've brought it home and started to install it, and if they don't like the terms of the EULA they can leave the box on the shelf and look at a competitor's product.
Making EULA's completely illegal as some people advocate is too extreme. Businesses and independent developers need some protection from the unwashed masses (like AOL users, har har).
I read the text of the bill, and I mostly agree with it. However, I'd like a change in this bill that says essentially the above - you want to use a EULA, fine, but the user had better be able to read it before they've purchased the software.
(And while we're suggesting changes, how about an across the board repeal of the DMCA?)
It's more than just a pain. Most retail stores prominently post something to the effect of "No refunds or returns of open software, music or DVDs. Exchanges Only!"
According to the EULA, you're supposed to return it to the place of purchase for a full refund if you don't agree, except they've already informed you that they refuse to abide by that agreement. The EULA not only attempts to force the customer into a contract with no explicit agreement, it also attempts to force the retailer into the agreement by requiring it to act as an agent of the manufacturer.
So you can return it if you don't agree, except you can't return it except to exchange it for another copy. Somewhere in here is a consipiracy to defraud, whether it's intentional or not.
When it comes to legislation it mostly boils down to what the congress critters believe will keep them in their jobs. If they believe that enough of public opinion is going to come down on them for going one way or another with a vote, they'll follow the opinions most of the time. In the absense of a clear public mandate they will go toward that which tends to promote their long term job stability, that being the big piles of cash from lobbyists.
Given that, in an environment where we've got an economy in the toilet, an active war on terrorism, and a soon to be war against Iraq, people as a whole have much better things to worry about than DRM. If you have to pick your next congressman based on their stand on war in Iraq vs. their stand on DRM, which is the higher priority? So, in the absense of a direct link between a congress critter's stand on DRM and their job security they'll go where the money is.
Don't get me wrong, I believe that congress critters do acutally make ethical decisions based on their personal belief. That sometimes in spite of money and public opinion they'll make a choice because they believe it to be the right one. But in order for legislation to make any real headway, you need more than just the ethical stand of a conscience possessing minority.
This sig has been temporarily disconnected or is no longer in service
An AC wrote:
> of this getting passed? How much support does this
> bill hold in congress?
I don't think it even matters if it ever gets passed. The real value of this bill is to make Congress stop and think.
The sergeant of the senate recently had to shut down the senate's P2P network because of all the file sharing going on. These congress critters aren't very tech savy, but they apparently share the public's interest in file sharing. Holling's bill would put a stop to that. DRM would keep them and us from even rip/mix/burning our legally bought CDs. I doubt Hollings and his cohorts even realize that - they've been fed a line by the media sharks.
What this bill will do is *education*. It will make them *think* about what they are doing and how it will affect their lives and ours. Hopefully it will keep them from ruining our future by passing the Hollings bill. If it does that, I will be happy.
If by some miracle this bill passes as well, I will be thrilled!
"Mothra, you are Life Eternal! Hear the prayers of your servants.
Come back to us from out of the legend.
Come and save us with your power of Life!"
From the US release of "Mothra" May 10, 1962
G Countdown: 26 days (www.godzillaoncube.com)