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?
... I'm being naive here, but my life hasn't changed a damn bit in the past four years.
So I honestly and candidly pose this question -- What's so bad about the DMCA again?
Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate. Ex-O'Reilly/MIT employee, now a full-time Google employee.
Section 1201 Chills Free Expression and Scientific Research.
Section 1201 Jeopardizes Fair Use.
Section 1201 Impedes Competition and Innovation.
Just one page down. Not to mention a buttload of examples towards the end.
Yes, do it!
I did and I don't even live in the USA.
You get a really cool t-shirt and the EFF are the only people really out there fighting for what is right... They deserve your support.
Don't but that CD! Join the EFF instead!
These problems are just uneducated judges! If these activist organizations took the time to compile a packet to educated judges instead of complaining, there would be much less misinterpratation of the law.
With my job as a police officer, I know how little the judges actually know about new laws, and often need to be educated by the lawyers about the law they are trying.
Well, the DMCA so far hasn't made a discernible difference in everyday life.
Sure, the FatWallet fiasco demonstrates the "inaneness" of the law but it hasn't affected Joe Sixpack yet.
It does affect those who directly fall in the face or corporations which generally tend to continue generating revenue from existing products instead of adapting/improving them*
*Note that this is not a slam against all these corporations. R&D is a bitch.
You've joined the EFF, right?
No. For a start, donations to the EFF are not tax-deductible if you're not a US citizen.
Even if they were, I don't feel I earn enough to donate effectively. People who throw them $50 a year are great in large numbers, but you're hardly buying a couple of minutes of campaigning time for them.
I prefer to keep my money and spend it on things which means I don't have to fall into legal traps. If the people who still use Windows XP and keep throwing $1000+ into the EFF every year actually spent that on Linux training, then they're doing a lot better for the world than giving their $$ to the EFF.
Lastly, I think the EFF is a good idea, but if people believe it's going to be their mouthpiece, they are sorely wrong. One large charity is easy for the government to ignore. Millions of complaining citizens are not. Support the things you want directly, instead of giving $1000 to the EFF and feeling 'good about yourself.'
Just my opinion of course.
mogorific carpentry experiments
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 ----
if you go HERE it would seeem that the RIAA has changed its mind. This article is more likely bogus since the RIAA was hacked again yesterday and can be seen HERE. Its still very funny to read.
You've joined the EFF, right? /., or EFF, or attend conferences, or try to do anything that is "non-standard" with digital devices or content. They just have no interest, and so they don't realize that eventually this spills over into everyday life.
:p). I wish I could transform that reaction into interest.
Yes, I have. And now I am considering ways to let those that haven't joined, or that aren't even aware of issues such as these, to become informed. My frustration is that it seems 99% of the general public is content wallow in ignorance. Not by choice, but simply by virtue of the fact that they don't read sites like
The reaction to my telling friends and associates about these things is that they look at me like I'm a nutcase (yeah ok sometimes I *am* a nutcase
Of *course* I thought it was a good thing. Obviously if Sony doesn't want me playing with their toy dog they've got a reason for it. And besides, Sony is a big company, so naturally it's not going to do anything immoral with these powers.
But while I'm on the subject, does anyone know of a house for sale in Europe?
I haven't joined the EFF, and I'm not going to until they change their stance on spam. They're so worried about freedom of speech they're ignoring the fact that the medium is being destroyed.
Disinfect the GNU General Public Virus!
that large corporations have dictated laws to consumers and educational institutions. Truth be told, I'm sure the corporations knew the judges were years (if not decades) behind technology, or at best, had such an elementry understanding that they could have persuaded them how they saw fit.
The worst of it is probably the hindering of college research. To me, it's one of the many fun and innovative areas for learning. How much research has been limited? - I suppose any that remotely touches any company's product or service. The majority of computer work seems to be moving more towards a trade school - like a mechanic, the innovative elite becoming a very few.
Seriously, the majority of programmers I see today just know 2 things: the Design Patterns book and Java (or other popular language). There and then a handful of "architects" that make the real innovations.
--------
Free your mind.
How about this?
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
To make this more accurate, Congress didn't intend to stifle these activities at first. But then, the entertainment industry came along, started writing sizable checks to the Congresspeople for bri...err, "campaign contributions," and changed Congress's mind on this. Sure they intended to chill those.
I pledge allegiance to the flag...
of the Corporate States of America...
There's European Digital Rights (EDRI) that is supposed to help the national European digital rights organizations to work together. Unfortunately most of the activity is still in national level while most of the new directives threatening freedom are planned in the European Union bodies.
Electronic Frontier Finland
Electronic Frontier Canada
Electronic Frontiers Australia
Electronic Frontier Ireland
Electronic Frontier Sverige
Electronisk Forpost Norge
Electronic Frontiers Italy
The squeaky wheel gets the grease, write your congressperson. Joining the EFF is a small step, but getting yourself personally involved is better. Voice your opinions to many people often on this matter. For the most part the reason the law still exists is that many people just don't know about it. Good article, perhaps it can provide YOU with your next "talking points" around the water cooler.
cluge
"Science is about ego as much as it is about discovery and truth " - I said it, so sue me.
The laws of any day have been to protect the elites.
The constitution helped protect the wealthy land owners and slave owners, it didn't do jack for the litte guy.
NAFTA and the DMCA will make the country just fine for the people who matter, the rich people.
If wages for workers are driven down to the ground and they industries can all move to countries with cheaper labor that's great for the elites.
And since there will be the same if not more money going to the elites on top the GDP and GNP will continue to rise and people will think life is grand. And it is grand, for the elites.
Sorry but this country has always been for the elites. Why do you think in the beginning only wealthy, land owning, white males could vote?
Ya sure now that they have a powerful propoganda apperatus (TV, Radio) they can let the common folk vote. Look at opensecrets.org, try finding an election race where the guy who spent the most money didn't win...the government is for the wealthy elites by the wealthy elites and it always has been and it always will be. Sorry.
"All men are created equal" while only rich white men can vote and the president owns slaves. That's fucking laughable man. This country it a joke and the joke is on the working class.
If you did, did it change your vote?
Is your future vote for or against your legislator going to depend on your legislator's opinion of the DMCA and its effects?
Ed Craig "Who cares what you think?" George W. Bush, 4th of July 2001
What free speech of Dmitry's was censored? Should the actions of AlterSlash be protected as free speech?
As for bnetd, their server was shut down due to violations of regular old copyright law in addition to DMCA violations. All the DMCA did here was keep Blizzard from being allowed to sue the ISP.
As for your third link, I think it's quite a stretch to say that the DMCA is responsible, since the DMCA does not even apply. Without the DMCA the RIAA just would have threatened to sue under some other law.
...the DMCA is quite harmless. As the DMCA has never been tested in court, it can't be said it's a bad law because we, including the EFF, truly don't know the extent of its abilities to stifle free speech and innovation. Now, one might be able to say that the threat of using the DMCA has stifled innovation and censored feee speech , but this is far different from actually being the root of the problem.
Not to mention that both sides have waged an antagonistioc war against each other from day one with Napster firing the "shot heard around the internet", so to speak. One of these days the geeks are going to realize that laws apply to the internet as much as they do in reality and that information doesn't want to be free, it simply wants to be information, nothing more, nothing less.
If I'm not mistaken, cops have been used to enforce the DMCA precisely once. To arrest and detain Sklyarov. And even that was at the behest of Adobe. Every other case has been lawyers sending nastygrams threatening to obliterate your corporeal existence if you should fail to obey.
Dyolf Knip
Executive Summary: Any measure for stopping spam must ensure that all non-spam messages reach their intended recipients.
And anti-spam blacklists, such as the MAPS RBL (Mail Abuse Prevention System Realtime Blackhole List, the most popular), result in a large number of Internet service providers (ISPs) surreptitiously blocking large amounts of non-spam from innocent people. This is because they block all email from entire IP address blocks--even from entire nations. This is done with no notice to the users, who do not even know that their mail is not being delivered.
That is exactly the situation. Large ISPs such as AOL and email providers like M$ Hotmail all practice this. The result is that mail from smaller ISPs is blocked. How convienent for the larger ISPs. No dial up box may send mail and often the upstream smtp provider is blocked as well.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
But if I buy a DVD and wanna burn a copy to my computer, ooo, well, I must be a felon, cause I had to circumvent encryption on the DVD. But, wait, don't I already own this? Don't I have the right to use that however the hell I wish, as long as I don't threaten that corporation's profits? How can any sane individual argue that making a back up copy is not in my rights?
Or what about when a bug is found in Windows? Shouldn't I be allowed to know about this? I bought it, if theres a flaw, I should be told. Of course this ignores the fact that Windows is basically one big flaw, but you get the drift. I own it, I use it, and any errors affect me directly if theres a security breach or performance issue.
This whole issue will finally be solved when Nike manages to get the law changed so Corporations can lie and legally get away with it no matter what, and some politician is sued for copyright infringement when he says he invented the internet or something and doesn't get in trouble for it.
Mod Points: Helping you keep your opinion to yourself.
Like the opt-out "do not call me list" that requires you to Register With The State to avoid telemarketers, doesn't joining the EFF increase your exposure? Wouldn't a list of EFF members make a good start for investigations? I might join, but I'm not joining with my real name.
I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
I have now...
--== BEGIN FWD ==--
Thank you very much for taking the time to fill out
our online donation form. This e-mail may serve as
your receipt for your tax deductible donation to the
Electronic Frontier Foundation.
On 2003-1-12 you contributed US$65
to the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF)
for a one year membership with the organization.
Your Anonymizer key will be e-mailed to you within 7 days.
--== END FWD ==--
Who's with me?
http://kered.org
I can't say exactly which laws are responsible for the changes, but it seems the DMCA certainly plays a role in the changes to my daily life.
Work - I work as a new media designer for not-for-profits.
Ex. 1 - Client wants still image from *their* DVD.
Problem: Disallowed - copy protection measures.
Solution - find a quasi-legal application on the interent.
Ex. 2 - Client wants 7 hours of VHS transferred to DV. Solution: pass signal thru DVcam to Mac
Problem: Disallowed - copy protection
(It is never easy to really know whether something is impossible for technical reasons or due to intentional disabling for copy protection reasons.)
Solution: copy 7 hours to DV tape; capture 7 hours to Mac
Cost: doubles
Ex. 3 - Client wants their TV commercial spliced into other ads for 'internal' use - to show the ad in context.
Solution - No. Turn down job. Advise against. Not in this climate.
Ex. 4 - User's Mac frozen from attempting to play music disc.
Solution: force restart while holding down mouse key
Cost: User's work lost.
New workplace music policy: dunno. No CDs/music discs? Communal MP3 library, ripped by technicians? Resulting network impact?
This could easily get to be a long list.
The point is that small creative businesses which use 'prosumer' gear increasingly find that they can't easily accomplish simple jobs. It is becoming increasingly difficult to purchase equipment (crippled functions are rarely highlighted). For example, we bought a MiniDisc recorder for interviews. What if we wanted to actually use the interviews for something?
A growing number of digital devices (TV tuners, DVD players, audio recorders, etc) only have analog outputs for copy protection.
Media - media formats like DVD, or MiniDV tapes are arbitrarily smaller than their 'commercial' equivilents. We pay taxes on media. In Canada, $100 will be added to the price of a $600 iPod if media taxes are raised and extended to their proposed level. In the US and Canada, we pay taxes on audio and video tapes, recordable CDs and DVDs, and we can basically look forward to taxes on all storage mediums. (In Canada, it's just more obvious than in the US.) Taxes appear to by calculated by size. Next time you buy a 250Gb hard drive, consider how much money is going to the RIAA and MPAA. (I don't know how I am affected in the UK, because apparently I lost my copying rights when I moved here. I don't think we're allowed to copy anything; not even TV - there is no 'fair use' in the UK.)
Fun - I do the same kind of stuff for fun - for my friends.
Like work, it's an exercise in frustration. The transition from analog to digital is about high-end production. Final output will probably be analog for the forseeable future.
Entertainment -
CDs - The proposition that I'm going to move back to listening to CDs after having tasted MP3s is terribly misguided. I didn't think it would affect the kind of music I listen to (underground hiphop) - it has. Buy CD. Get home. No CD logo. Copy protection chart. May not play on Mac. Rips fine. But why is it distorted? Is it just really bassy? Is it from copy protection? Is it worth it? (No.)
DVD player - it was free. It was useless.
Problem - Analog SCART ouput only. No SCART on TV.
Solution - Route through VCR.
Problem - Disallowed. Copy protection.
Solution - Give DVD player to mother-in-law
Digital TV tuner - digital TV is 'computerized' TV. It's Mpeg2. From camera to editing to broadcast to reception, it's all digital - just like my computer and it's digital display. DVB, the standards body has settled on Firewire as the digital connection standard. At the moment in the UK, there are no devices with digital outputs. Perhaps once the Macrovision is implemented on our digital TV, we will get digital outputs. This just means it that our computer can't replace the TV the way it has replaced the stereo and DVD player because the display is digital LCD. As with everything, it can be done. But it's expensive and thus far, the results are barely viewable. (It's a complicated problem, but the point is that it would be much simpler were it not for copyright concerns. I know, it is also about the predominance of analog displays and who is subsidizing the TV tuners - satellite and cable companies, Tivo, etc.)
I don't know how much of this is attributable to the DMCA, but I am constantly challenged by changes over the past 4 years. Sure, you can get around virtually any roadblock with analog to digital convertors and quasi-legal black boxes, software, and by accepting loss of quality. But it's expensive, time-consuming, and frustrating.
Previously, one avoided buying certain 'cripple-ware' brands. Now it seems everything is 'cripple-ware' and the question is whether to buy anything at all. Unfortunately, the post-dotcom-bubble, post-911 economic downturn will overshadow the economic cost of copy-protection hysteria.
Of course they intended it: The DMCA benefits government more than it benefits the corporations who bribed congress into passing it. Any expansion of government yields power and profit for those in control. Government has ultimate control, not the corporations.
When the full-scale "war on drugs" was forced upon the people some 50 years ago, congress fully understood that the consequences would be measured in violent crime (from the resulting black market), loss of civil rights (most of which have nothing to do with drug use), skyrocketing tax rates, and corruption on all levels of government. But they chose to wage war against the people for exactly the same reason they chose to adopt the DMCA: Because it benefits government. Like any business, the primary objective of government is to profit and expand market share. These laws do exactly that.
As the saying goes, you can't rule a nation of innocents. The more laws forced upon the people, the more power and profit yielded for government.
...as I live in the land of fair use, also called Norway. So now I'll decrypt, decripple and reburn my DVDs with no region coding/RCE/control blocker/copyright warning/whatever and play discs from any region in any region DVD player with a good conscience. And format-shift it so I can have a divx on my (DVD-less) laptop too. (Yes, I know DeCSS no longer works. But you get the idea.)
:)
So how's life in land of the free and home of the brave?
Kjella
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
I find it curious that they'd title it the same as John Ross's novel (ISBN 1-888118-04-0) where he takes on the National Firearm Act of 1934. Using perhaps a more lecturing style than Ayn Rand in "Atlas Shrugged" he synthesises a set of consequences that leads defenders of the Bill of Rights to armed conflict with the US Government -- specifically lone gun assasinations of armed tax agents and the legislators that created them.
I wonder if the EFF wanted a subliminal association....
A New Vision for the Recording Industry
The past year has been one of the worst in the previous decade for the music industry. While factors beyond our control, such as the down-turn in the American economy, have no doubt contributed to this, the industry itself can certain not completely escape blame. In an attempt correct this, representatives from our member labels recently met to discuss ways of reforming the industry. The result of the meeting was a set of changes to current policies, outlined below, which, when implemented, we hope will pull the industry out of its current slump.
Our member labels will halt all plans to sell copy-restricted CDs. Restricting the use of CDs devalues the product, reducing the incentive for consumers to buy them. Also we believe that as time goes on, the public will realize, as we have, that due to the viral natural of distribution through file-sharing networks copy-restriction will never be effective at preventing online piracy but rather is indented to force our customers to buy the same music on multiple media.
We also vow to stop pursuing the companies behind file-sharing networks in court. In light of studies by reputable pollsters that have shown that most users of file-sharing networks reported that their music purchases increased in frequency, there seems to be little reason to continue spending millions in an attempt to shut down these services. Instead, we plan to propose to settle out of court in exchange for a royalty system based on a fraction of profit (only fair, given that these profits are derived in part from our products).
We will also stop lobbying politicians to impose draconian copyright laws on the American people. Last June, Rep. Rick Berman, who received more campaign donations from the entertainment industry than any other Congressperson, proposed legislation that would exempt rights-holders from anti-hacking law in order that they might exact vigilante-style justice on file-sharers. Initially we were thrilled at the display of the political might of our money, but later were sickened as we realized the implications for democracy in America. Morally, we cannot continue this manipulation of the political system.
In addition to the reasons just given, we also are doing both of the above, halting the lawsuits against the companies file-sharing services and stopping our coercive political contributions, in an attempt to restore consumer confidence in the music industry. Our customers will know longer will feel guilty after buying a CD, now knowing that the proceeds from their purchases will not be used to support causes that harm them and their peers.
To further convince consumers that the proceeds from their music purchases are well spent, we will be attempting to treat our talent more fairly. At the core of this effort will be the halting of collusion between labels on recording contracts. While overlooked by anti-trust law, the elimination of competition caused by collusion is just as harmful to the producers of content as it is to the consumers. No longer will artists be forced into signing contracts which reduce artist''s royalties for a multitude of arbitrary or antiquated reasons for if any label attempts such abuse, they''ll be certain to lose their talent to a competitor. We believe that this can be undertaken without damaging industry profitability. Firstly, the previously mentioned reduced legal and political expenditures will help to offset the cost. Secondly, we plan fix the sobering statistic that nine out of ten industry ventures end up failing recovering their costs. This figure would be unacceptable outside the entertainment industry and, while it was viable inside it due to the abuse of artists, there is no reason it should not be possible to vastly improve upon it.
Finally, we promise to stop trying to brainwash the world into thinking of music as property, something that an artist has an innate right to control, even after the media that embodies that music has changed hands. Rather, we will recognized only the original goal of copyright law in America, to benefit the average citizen by creating a incentive to produce creative works. We will also launch a publicity campaign to remind the public of this principle, unknown to many. We hope that upon learning that the true purpose of copyright law is to benefit them, average citizens will be more likely to respect it.
It is our hope that these policy changes will revitalize the industry and make it deserving of the unique place it holds within American culture.
From what I'm hearing, thinks aren't going to be any better in Europe. There are few safe havens anymore, with the EU and the US going back and forth with who can stifle creative freedom and innovation more and with the US testing the waters of how far the arm of their law can reach across international borders.
No, things are looking grim until the balance of power and thought shifts dramatically to the point where the United States is pressuring countries to listen to the citizens instead of the corporates instead of the other way around.
Some people...
Sony, Microsoft, MPAA, RIAA paid good money for the DMCA. If you want it repealed, you need to start contributing to some congressmen. Re-election campaigns don't come cheap, you know.
Remember: If all else fails, graft works. Pay the right people in power the right amount of money and you will get what you want.
ElcomSoft's Advanced e-Book Processor, which translates e-books from Adobe's eBook format to Adobe's PDF, and "thereby allows a computer to read an eBook out loud using text-to-speech software, which is particularly important for visually-impaired individuals." Therefore, the DCMA is in direct violation of the ADA (American Disabilities Act). Not to mention the First Amendment. You may not personally be physically challenged in such a way, but if this law restricts the abilities of a fellow citizen's right to knowledge, shouldn't you be just as upset?
After 4 years, does anybody know if there is/was a lawsuit invoking the DMCA against sombody who is actually pirating content?
- that the DMCA and laws like it are simply logical progression of copyrights. You can't tell people that they have certain types of rights and never expect them to never try and secure those rights. To expect so would be hypocritical and is just as wrong as the DMCA is. Information is so easy to copy and manipulate that copyrights are simply not going to be workable unless all information is controlled or none of it. It simply amazes me to hear people cry bloody murder about the DMCA, but never even consider the root of the problem.
All I ever get in reply is this crazy propaganda about the poor starving artist and how they are they are so valuable and holy while anybody elese in society who may have the need to copy things is a worthless piece of cr*p incapable of adding any value to society. Perhaps this is just to distract from the fact that for every artist that makes it, there are 10,000 living in dirt poverty who copyrights haven't helped one darn bit. Perhaps it's to keep people from noticing how bad copyrights really are.
I admit it's a tough cookie to crack and I don't think there's any simple solutions.
..."
However, I do think it all depends on how the issue is raised. There are a few openings I've found work:
1) Any conversation about the future of technology. If a non-techish friends asks you anything about where computers and media will be going in the future, point out that much of that will depend on the threats posed by big media companies to consumer freedom.
2) Any mention of the use of current technologies which are threatened by repressive legislation.
- "So I just burned a great mix CD from the mp3s on my computer."
- "Cool. Did you know that if the record industry has their way, no one will be able to do that in a few years?
3) Any conversation about abuses of corporate power in general. A great many folks these days have become very distrustful of corporate behemoths for obvious reasons. Often they will get what you're talking about much more quickly if it can be related to their own experiences and opinions about corporations. Corporate control over politics is a particularly good opening.
- "Well that's because politicians don't give a damn about the voters, only the corporate fatcats that are giving them money."
- "Yeah, isn't it terrible? Did you know the record and movie companies have been donating millions of dollars to restrict our freedoms to listen to music and watch movies on computers?"
(In my travels in leftie political circles, I've often found that even people who don't know the first thing about technology often have a sympathetic ear for topics like the DMCA and such, because they're already _very_ suspicious of media conglomerates, for a whole slew of other reasons.)
Anyhow, keep up the good fight.
Red All Over: Rambling Missives from an Aspiring Revolutionary
- stifle innovation
- censor free speech
- threaten academic/scientific (but not corporate) research
- jeopardizes fair use
Just what is there on this list that major corporations, particularly Hollywood content providers would object to? What is there on this list that regardless of stated goals, your Congressasshole would care about?If it interfered with the profits of major campaign contributors, it would have been repealed days after passage. All it interferes with are the rights of the people and small companies.
I see no Unintended Consequences here.
I think it's going to interfere with corporate profits eventually, but given that suits don't look forward more than a quarter in terms of where things are going, this is also a non-starter.
Tech Public Policy stuff
Well,
Unfortunately the copyright law is going to be changed also in Norway, based on EUCD. And it's going to be even worse than DMCA. So enjoy your freedom as long as you can!
V.
Well,
The fight against EUCD has to be at the moment on the national level, because the member countries are implementing the law. Of course pan-European coordination of activies, lobbying and research would help. And yes, in the future the campaigning has to happen both in EU and national level to stop initiatives like Broadcast Flag, mandatory DRM and so on..
Ville Oksanen
Electronic Frontier Finland
Well, while our lives at home haven't changed a whole lot in the last four years piles of legal precedants are being built up in court that will change our lives quite a bit. The DMCA doesn't change the fact that it is illegal to make copies of copyrighted material for non-personal use, and it really doesn't go any further to protect those copyrighted works. What it does do is allow the patent holders for the ecryption technology(like CSS) to determine how their content(legally purchased or not) is viewed. In other words, if they decide that they don't want to license DeCSS to anyone writing software for platforms they don't approve of(Linux), they need only claim DMCA infringement on anyone who goes ahead and comes up with some DeCSS on their own. That's the exapmple that's been played out. Why haven't we seen more examples of this type of legal action? The MPAA and the RIAA haven't had enough time to sue everyone yet, and they need to build up some significant legal precedant.
My Blog
It's well-established that judges can interpret Congress's intent in writing a law to determine how it should be applied (the Supreme Court probably does this more than lower courts do, but in principle any federal court can). The EFF claims that the DMCA is being applied in ways Congress didn't intend, which would indicate that this is a failure on the part of judges to properly understand Congress's intent.
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
You're not a victim of loss of connectivity through MAPS. You're a victim of the spammer that caused the MAPS listing.
I say maps has a list of all "dial up" IP addresses and large ISPs refuse to take mail from those IPs. Who on that list deserves that kind of treatment? It's being abused to block small ISP mail servers too.
I'll bet you a nickle that most spam comes from competing large ISPs that want to wreck each others service. Today, my wife got a letter from "bloddy_buttholes." Stuff like that does not come from anyone who really wants to sell anything, it comes from someone that wants to disrupt email. It's people like that that should be punished, not someone like me who simply wants to send an email to his mom's AOL account.
When all the small ISPs are dead, it's a small step for the large survivors to require certian mail agents. If you have not heard enough clueless, "I'm sorry we don't support anything but M$-crap-program", just wait. My reply is that I don't need their support for my software, I simply need their mail server to act right. One day they will use the DMCA and Federal laws agianst taking cable services without permission to lock out any software they don't like.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
CNN doesn't report things like this (or anything else like DMCA troubles) because it is fundamentally anti-government in tone, and AOL-TW (parent company of CNN) has apparently make it company policy to be pro-government on *every* story they cover.
Seriously, I can't stand to tune into CNN anymore. It's more like PNN (Propaganda News Network). Their total lack of balls to portray anything other than the World According to Bush is just painful to watch.
Look at the tomato! Isn't it sad? He can't dance! Poor tomato!
It's an attack on not just civil liberties, but the high-tech economy. If you want to live in a nation of burger-flippers, you're pro-Hollywood.
Search here or try google if you know how.
Of course, in your case, "You want fries with that?" is probably your on-the-job reality, you aren't a programmer worried about the economy tanking so badly that service industry might be where you'll eventually wind up.
Tech Public Policy stuff
Thanks! And what's really funny... if the RIAA had any sense, every word would be true!
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?