Slashdot Mirror
EFF Urges Support for Rep. Boucher's DMCRA
DarkSparks writes "The EFF is urging everyone to contact their Representatives and ask them to co-sponsor Representative Rick Boucher and John Doolittle's recently introduced Digital Media Consumers' Rights Act (DMCRA, H.R. 5544), which would introduce labelling requirements for usage-impaired "copy-protected" compact discs, as well as make several key amendments to the DMCA, including affirming the right of scientific research into technology protection measures and affirming the right of citizens to circumvent technology measures to gain access to copyrighted works they've purchased."
Followed by: "The Sound Quality Of This Disc Has Intentionally Been Reduced To Prevent You From Pirating It You Thief - Now Buy It Like We Tell You To!"
Maybe when publishing companies (music and film both) start realizing that consumers are the ones who pay their salary, they'll start treating us with less contempt. Sorry to say that there are a whole lot of people who are NOT sheep content to be shorn of their hard-earned money.
At some point when faced with all of the DRM crap that companies are trying to force us into, I'll just decide to move on to other activities which are less technologically oriented.
Even now, the rise in film prices to over $12 per ticket is severely limiting the number of movies I go to. That doesn't mean I download them on the PC or anything, but I just spend my time doing other things instead...
"Nothing strengthens authority so much as silence." - Charles de Gaulle
This is not attempting to be another law, and thereby conflicting with the DMCA. It ammends the DMCA..
"Section 5 makes the necessary changes to the DMCA to restore the historic balance in U.S. copyright law."
You can't (AFAIK) make changes to law without going through the process of sponsoring another bill, etc.. It doesn't mean we will have two sets of laws, only that the originals will be changed. They do not want to repeal the entire DMCA, just correct it.
If a law banning cheese came in to force, then the correct action would be to repeal that law, not to introduce another one limiting it.
Your post is unclear.
Are you saying that it is poor strategy to limit bad laws? Or are you saying that it is not possible to change a law without repealing it first?
If either is the case, I disagree.
especially when same companies dump cheap dvd's to consumers too(same amount for going to movies as to _buying_ a dvd, not to mention per person costs when you rent a movie with couple of friends, this is what makes cd prices freaky high too, you can buy the movie itself cheaper than the soundtrack, now, which costs more to produce, a full length film or a 40minute cd?ok, film was supposed to make money at the box office, but 'made for video' movies are even cheaper!).
duplicable things tend to get copied..
and, you don't have to stop watching entertainment even if stopped watching bigstudiobozostuff, there's already vast amounts of free to distribute/enjoy music online, and some movies too, and freaky amount of amateur webcomics and flash cartoons.
after umpteen years you can probably do a film as fast as you can do the script(granted, it might not be a good film, but most s*** out of hwood are generic, gray mass anyways)
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
I agree with you 101%; For me, copy protected music will be the *REASON* to stop buying music. My cd collection lives under my bed, everything gets transfered to mp3 then stowed. I have 4 mp3 players, and I pretty much dont leave the house without one of them. I like things this way, I like my mp3 players. I'm not buying new hardware for sony, I'm gonna find new artists who aren't protected. If theres something I can't live without [ie a sting album, and he's a media whore so I know he'll be the first guy out there with copy protection], I'll download the MP3 and be a pirate :D.
Religion is a gateway psychosis. -- Dave Foley
Remember, you're talking about the company whose EULA states that your right to use the operating system that you paid for when you bought your computer ends when you no longer own the hardware. Ain't no way they'd back anything like this bill.
Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.
Give his office a call in a few days and let them know you'd like to discuss your concerns about the bill with your Congresscritter.
Tell him how you want him to vote and briefly, why.
If a few hundred people in your district do this, you've got yourself a new friend and a vote.
Of course, a high tech community PAC would save us all a lot of trouble in this area.
Tech Public Policy stuff
Athletic Scholarships to universities make as much sense as academic scholarships to sports teams.
However I want to point out a little flaw in your logic. When did you get your last "civic classes"? (We don't even have that over here in Europe) Well, for some of us here this might have been a long time ago. I don't even remember much of the Phyics and Chemestry from highschool and that stuff actually *interested me* (unlike History).
Here is an analogy: what you get in "civic classes" we usually get in History. While I don't surely didn't get the details of the code of laws in the United States, I can assure you I have completely seen how the European Union works, including the tiny horrible details you don't *want* to know. That was about 8 years ago. Today, I cannot give you more than a summary of what the EU is, nor can I tell you what the role of the European Parliament or the European Comission is. So I don't know, and yet I only saw these things eight years ago!
So tell me again? You expect every United State Citzen to remember everything they were thaught in every class they had in Highschool? I've got news for you: people forget!
Basically, American copyright law is a temporary excemption of the right of the public for the promotion of culture and science.
How about a law that would basically protect DRM systems, but *only* if these systems are designed to release their contents without further limits once the copyright of the work has expired (with an emphasis on the release part, i.e. if in doubt, release, because it finally belongs to the public domain, and to keep the information locked is only a temporary exception)?
This would all be right- and lawful to both sides of the copyright, but I consider an acceptable technical implementation of such a system is not feasible, therefor it would be impossible to protect a DRM system by law, because it cannot fulfil the demand of releasing the work once the copyright has expired.
Don't hold your breath ... but do write your congressman and your local newspaper. Fighting and loosing is much better than rolling over. If we can't just overturn DCMA in one fell swoop, then we should chip away at it incrementally. Writing a letter to your congressman will have more impact than posting here.
I can tell you from experience that my father successfully got congresspeople elected with a PAC and he is no politician. Just a doctor (now retired, this was some years ago) who was fighting to keep his practice alive despite being told by insurance companies what to prescribe. He got thousands of doctors in three states to act (the purpose was to build a doctors' HMO and hospital, and they got pretty far before some sharks took over) and I believe they got a lot of attention (up to the president) and helped get a congressman elected. An anti-bigmusic/anti-closedsource PAC might be interesting if you could convince geeks to 1) put up money and 2) speak out. Of course maybe just sending the money to the EFF is best, not an expert about politics myself.
I am writing today to ask you to co-sponsor Rep. Boucher &
Doolittle's Digital Media Consumers' Rights Act (DMCRA, H.R. 5544).
I believe that recent movements in copyright law have unfairly plagued
the rights of consumers with respect to their ownership of digital
media.
Specifically, the DMCRA would require producers of digital media to
label any media that has been copy protected or otherwise crippled
in a way that would make that media unusable in certain devices, such
as personal computers, automotive stereo equipment, and other consumer
devices. I believe that consumers have the right to informed consent
with respect to purchases of digital media.
The DMCRA would also codify the right of the consumer to make fair-use
copies of any media they own. For example, a consumer who purchases a
CD should be explicitly allowed and encouraged by law to make copies of
that information for use in his/her automobile, portable diskless audio player,
or other device that may not be able to access that information on its
native media.
I also wish to convey and affirm my belief that it is absolutely wrong
to make copies of information for the purpose of avoiding paying for it.
Supporting this law is not supporting theft of intellectual property. It
is unfortunate that those who would use tools such as personal computers
and peer-to-peer networks to steal information have brought about the
changes in copyright law that have stripped the rights of law-abiding
consumers. It should be solemnly noted that personal computers don't
cause people to steal music just as peer-to-peer networks are not the cause
of piracy. We have seen many new and innovative technologies that have
a perfectly legitimate use in society, destroyed by the idea that it is
appropriate to punish everyone for the crimes of a select few who choose
to misuse those technologies.
There are other benefits to the DMCRA, both for consumers and our society
as a whole, and I emplore you to study this document for all of its merits.
I hope you will co-sponsor the DMCRA and show your support for the
public's rights in digital media. Thank you for your time.
Sincerely,
Politicians aren't average consumers. The only time most of them back consumer (rather than corporate) interests is when they absolutely have to do so.
I highly doubt that any of the major music labels or film companies are too worried about a lack of consumer demand. Sure they whine a whole bunch about pirating leading them to bankruptcy, but I think we all know well enough by now that's just not true.
Hmmm...have I said anything that hasn't been said in at least 100 /. posts thus far? Oh well, screw the karma, I'm procrastinating homework right now.
Anyway, I applaud you for doing the ethical thing. Yes, if everyone else followed your model of boycotting ridiculously over-priced entertainmet, then maybe traditional economics would come into play and movie ticket prices would drop down. But most people do one or both of the following instead:
a) Pirate the movie/music instead
b) Pay whatever it costs anyway
From personal experience, I find that most people pirate movies/music they would have rented/borrowed . And they still pay to see/buy movies/CDs they really want to see/own. Let's face it, Yoda yielding a light saber on your 17" CRT and Altec Lansings isn't the same as watching it on the big screen with theater audio.
So, all in all, we're back where we were at the beginning. Pirating won't stop anytime soon (check out last sunday's userfriendly). The movie & music industries aren't about to agree to all our demands. DRM isn't going to disappear simply due to geek dislike (does your mom know what DRM is?). Instead, let's just try to get the letter of the law placed somewhere in the middle and play it by ear from there.
1. You need to turn off your heuristics equating "consumer advocacy" with "government controlled market". It's simplistic and plain obtuse.
2. If you think requiring CD labels is anti-freemarket, then you should be SHITTING YOUR PANTS about the DMCA (The Horrible law this new law is trying to fix)
Why you ask?
The DMCA currently makes it a criminal offense (5 years, $250,000 fine) to create, distribute, or sell any technology that might get around a copyprotection mechanism.
Let me further explain...
Say Sony comes out with a new CD format that's encrypted and can only be played on sony equipment, which doesn't allow you to burn copies, convert to MP3, etc.
Let's say, Phillips engineers figured out how to decrypt this new CD format, and they wanted to a sell player for this CD format.
Before the DMCA, this would have been ok.
Now, It's a criminal offense...
That's what happened when some 16 year old Norwegian kid wrote a program to play DVDs on Linux.
According to the courts, THIS is illegal. If you give a copy of this program to your friend, or sell it, you *COULD* be jailed 5 year and fined up to $250,000 in fines...
So far, the MPAA and the courts haven't enforced this part of the DMCA. They've taking a shit load of people to court, even got a lot of injunctions barring people from spreading the Linux DVD player, but no criminal convictions to date. There was a close call with a Russian programmer who wrote a program allowing eBook users to convert thier eBooks to other formats, but the DOJ dropped it.
I don't know about you, but making legitimate technology illegal is about as anti-freemarket as it gets.
Which do you consider more statist, forcing some silly label, or outlawing an entire legitimate technology sub-sector?
BTW, As a libertarian, I'm about as free-market as it gets.
"Communism is like having one [local] phone company " - Lenny Bruce