Slashdot Mirror
Open Debate Between RIAA VP And DMCA Critic
A GW student writes "The George Washington University's School of Engineering and Applied Science along with the Cyberspace Policy Institute are sponsoring some kind (hasn't really been decided yet) of debate between Stanley Pierre-Louis, Vice President Legal Affairs for the Recording Industry Association of America and Professor James Boyle of Duke Law School. Remember, Prof. Boyle just received an anonymous $1 million to fight the DMCA. The event is open to the public. It will take place on Tuesday October 8 in Washington, DC on GW's campus. The abstract and other details are here. Stick around, and the next day you can go to the Supreme Court to see Lawrence Lessig argue Eldred v. Ashcroft."
It would be good if they would encourage open debate on such subjects before they became la though, but I suppose any law which is bought in the interests of big business is at best one-sided.
This idea was invented by Shampoo.
I would assume that there are a few slashdot users out there, who work in different mainstream media outlets. Maybe your in the news department or in tech support. Try and bring this event to the attention of a news director, or reporter. Digital Music is hip and sexy, but the DMCA is invisible. There is what about a 1% penetration in to the American conciousness about it. Sadly nobody cares unless Stone Phillips tells them to. Lets get the word out people.
It was only a matter of time.
If anyone is curious as to GW's P2P policy, check out the following email which was sent to all students this week.
From: note@gwu.edu
Subject: New KaZaA Application Causes Network Problems
Over the past week, the GW data network has experienced heavy traffic and sporadic problems as a direct result of usage of the new KaZaA Version 2. KaZaA is a popular program used for direct file sharing, usually of media files (music, videos, etc.).
GW's network does not block peer-to-peer applications like Napster, KaZaA and Morpheus in an effort to maintain an open academic environment. However, network administrators do impose some bandwidth shaping on applications such as Napster, KaZaA and Morpheus to lower their priority and keep them from overwhelming all other GW data network traffic.
Unfortunately, the recent release of KaZaA Version 2 is causing network problems. KaZaA v2 is extremely adaptive, and appears to maliciously circumvent all controls and restrictions in place to limit use of bandwidth. As a result, the GW network is being overwhelmed by KaZaA v2 traffic.
Network traffic nearly doubled over the course of a week, overflowing the total capacity. As a result, network latency (the time it takes to return a
response) from GW to our nearest Internet provider increased over 200 times. This led to slowdowns to Webmail, the overall GWMail system and other applications.
ISS network administrators have determined that controls built into KaZaA Version 2 prohibit administrators from imposing bandwidth limitations. As a result, ISS has been forced to impose an overall rate-limit on the student residence halls, which produce the vast majority of KaZaA v2 traffic.
Network bandwidth is a shared common resource. Students who abuse this resource are sapping bandwidth from their peers. Please keep your usage of KaZaA v2 at a minimum and within the legal boundaries.
Please also be aware that KaZaA and other file sharing applications allow other users from around the world to download files *from you*, off of your bandwidth, which adds to the overall load on the GW network. GW strongly recommends that all users disable the file sharing option.
Network administrators and ISS management will continue to explore other solutions and, in the meantime, urge each member of the GW community to do their part in managing this shared resource.
Thank you.
(This message has been sent in accordance with George Washington University mass e-mail policy and procedure. This procedure is available online at http://helpdesk.gwu.edu for review. This message was requested by Information Systems and Services and was approved by the Chief Information Officer.)
Tensions between Free Software and Architectures of Control", which is very informative, as
well as quite funny in parts.
Anyone renember studying the older debates between anti-slave and free slave supporters, or more recently the debate between communisim and capitalisim. It wasn't long before each side was avoiding debates, or getting into worthless squabbles. It's just a fact of life, sometimes only action can resolve problems.
With both issues, people would cry out, if we could only get along! If we could only communicate! but the problem was not commnication, it was that one side is trying to gain benefit at the expense of others by force or coercion.
The same is true here. There is no equivalancy relationship here. There is no misunderstanding between civilized individuals. There is simply a raw conflict of interest and no amount of debate is going to change that. We should not be debating with them, but within ourselves - what are we going to do about them? How can we break, beat, or contain them?
Im convinced that the only way to do that is by insisting on civil-disobedience of copyright laws whenever possible. It is only then, when we drain them of their revenue stream and power that we will win - otherwise we will just be feeding and strengthening the beast intent on killing us.
Although this is possible, it is certainly not the case. Mp3s are not 'perfect digital copies', yet mp3s are the files that (for the most part) are being ditributed. Perhaps when broadband gives us LAN speeds, we'll see wav files being traded to the point of mp3s. Until then, 'perfect digital copies' (of music) still require access to the origial media. (For most people.)
Most people can still listen to their cassettes and scratchy records and be fine with the imperfections, so mp3s with their ease of storage and portabillity won't be going away anytime soon. People want a convenient way to listen to music, be it 8-tracks, Cds, cassettes, LPs, mp3s, or what-have-you. Wav files aren't that convenient. Yet.
However, I do buy records. Will you argue that the RI has lost a sale because I didn't go out and purchase a new CD? None of that money I spend at thrift stores and garage sales finds its way to artists, labels, or distributors. Yet I get to hear lots of great music for 50 cents an album. Would I have purchased the same album on CD for 9-17 dollars? No.
CDs ARE too expensive. Recent 'Big Label' music is for the most part uninspired and focus group driven. Radio has been taken over by a marketing company. Whether or not you agree with me doesn't change the fact that the RIAA is trying to remove my ability to create and distribute my own music. They are trying to kill first sale rights (allows used cd/record stores.) and fair use (my ability to copy a CD FOR MY OWN USE).
They are extending copyrights far longer than most people live. They are looking out for their OWN interests, yet still want me to eat up the insipid pap they ram down the public's throat.
I make music. So do many others. The RIAA would have it that I would have to go through them (certificates, licencing, copy-restrictions) no matter what I want for the music I create.
To answer your subject's question: "What is wrong with Copyrights?"
Nothing. Copyrights were 'invented' to give an author of a work exclusive use of his/her work for a *limited* amount of time. The copyright would expire after the author had had ample time to make money from their creation. The work would then be placed in the public domain and others could use it as they saw fit. The work could be changed, reworked and released as a wholly new creation. Copyrights prevented someone from taking a work, placing their name on it, and calling it their own. These are the things that copyright was intended for. Your subject and the post that follows are two separate issues.
Copying a CD is not the same as shoplifting a CD. It is the difference between removing a physical item and duplicating a physical item.
(Simile time) The first is like stealing a dollar. The second is counterfeiting a dollar.
I agree that either one denies the author of the work his/her due payment for making the work available. (They didn't have to)
Long winded rant over. Mod to your heart's content.
I just hope there aren't any fanatics in the crowd. There's a fine line between supporting your cause and driving others away from it, and there are people out there that can't see that line.
At worst, I hope the more sensible people shout down the fanatics that are on the same side.
Dark Nexus
"Sanity is calming, but madness is more interesting."