Slashdot Mirror


EFF Report: Four Years Under the DMCA

kylus writes "The EFF has a pretty nice article entitled "Unintended Consequences." Basically, it reviews the last four years of life under the law, and how use of the "anti-circumvention" clauses have been used to stifle innovation, censor free speech, and threaten academic/scientific research. It ends with a conclusion most on /. have been dicussing for ages: "Four years of experience with the "anti-circumvention" provisions of the DMCA demonstrate that the statute reaches too far, chilling a wide variety of legitimate activities in ways Congress did not intend."" You've joined the EFF, right?

2 of 182 comments (clear)

  1. Sure it was intended dont misunderstand them. by nurb432 · · Score: 2, Offtopic

    All this stuff benefits corporations and anti-rights groups.

    These groups are the ones that 'pay' the people that create the laws..

    They are not stupid, they have advisors that DO understand technology and law. They knew exactally what they were doing, we were stupid for letting it slip past us.

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  2. Why does CNN not report things like these ?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Offtopic



    U.S. Decision On Iraq - How Policy Was Set

    On Sept. 17, 2001, six days after the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, President Bush signed a 21/2-page document marked "TOP SECRET" that outlined the plan for going to war in Afghanistan as part of a global campaign against terrorism.
    Almost as a footnote, the document also directed the Pentagon to begin planning military options for an invasion of Iraq, senior administration officials said.
    The previously undisclosed Iraq directive is characteristic of an internal decision-making process that has been obscured from public view. Over the next nine months, the administration would make Iraq the central focus of its war on terrorism without producing a rich paper trail or record of key meetings and events leading to a formal decision to act against President Saddam Hussein, according to a review of administration decision-making based on interviews with more than 20 participants.
    Instead, participants said, the decision to confront Hussein at this time emerged in an ad hoc fashion. Often, the process circumvented traditional policymaking channels as longtime advocates of ousting Hussein pushed Iraq to the top of the agenda by connecting their cause to the war on terrorism.
    With the nation possibly on the brink of war, the result of this murky process continues to reverberate today: tepid support for military action at the State Department, muted concern in the military ranks of the Pentagon and general confusion among relatively senior officials -- and the public -- about how or even when the policy was decided.............

    Read the full article here - How U.S. Policy On Iraq Was Set