Slashdot Mirror
Digital Media Consumer Rights Act
irabinovitch writes "Representatives Rick Boucher and John Doolittle introduced the DMCRA which would to quote the EFF would "require labelling requirements for usage-impaired "copy-protected" compact discs, as well as several amendments to 1998's infamous Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA)." We always seem to complain about the DMCA around here now is our chance to change it! Check out this "Action Alert" at the EFF."
It is good to see that at least some U.S. politicians are trying to protect the right of the consumers.
I'm happy to say that in Holland, policies are a bit more consumer-centered.
How much they can scare Joe Public into sticking with the real thing. We should all pay for music from musicians, if you don't think they deserve it, don't pay, if you don't like their music, don't pay, if you want to listen to a preview, listen to the radio, if you want to buy MP3's online, do that, if you think musicians get paid to much, don't pay, they have a right to charge what they want and to who they want.
:-(
Now on the other hand, we should vote with our wallets and not buy copy protected music CD's that SUCK! especially in cheap ass car CD players...
TQ
I'm not american, I have no money (unemployed), but I want to support this because those laws seem to get exported along with the rest - is there any way I can support this, through sending some letters maybe?
Daniel
Carpe Diem
Oh man we're gonna see just how good the highly paid lobbyists for the content industry are this week ;)
------- "From bored to fanboy in 3.8 asian girls" ----------
While signing the EFF letter is a great place to start, those of us with extra free time should take the time to craft our own thoughts on the issue and send those in as well. Many copies of a similar letter have a strong effect, but original letters show that you _really_ care and will probably remember around voting season.
Past that, we should also, as the EFF states, tell our families and friends about the issue. Not many people care about this currently, because not many people know, and the information sources most people rely upon are more concerned with 5 minute wheather reports than reporting on people's rights being stripped away.
This reminds me of the old quote,
:)
"If pro is the opposite of con, what's the opposite of progress?"
If nothing else, I have to laugh at the proposed name (DMCRA). It's a poignant acronym, with just the right amount of "ha-ha" expected. Once again we have the pols battling it out against each other, with the target result being to counteract each other. For once, I hope this is achieved. To counter the DMCA with the DMCRA would raise my spirits for sure.
Thank you, Rep. Boucher, for raising a subtle yet interpretable middle finger to the DMCA (and for your other clueful work). If ever I meet you, I owe you a drink, and that's a promise
"BSD: Free as in speech. Linux: Free as in beer. Windows 10: Free as in herpes." --Man On Pink Corner in #52607549.
Here's the list, according to Thomas. Note the Rep that withdrew last week, any Slashdotters from RI might want to try to find out why?
Rep Andrews, Robert E. - 1/29/2003 [NJ-1]
Rep Bachus, Spencer - 1/7/2003 [AL-6]
Rep Barton, Joe - 1/29/2003 [TX-6]
Rep Doolittle, John T. - 1/7/2003 [CA-4]
Rep Kennedy, Patrick J. - 1/7/2003(withdrawn - 1/28/2003) [RI-1]
finally something intelligent happening south of the border & nothing to do. when i sent out letters regarding out lastest tax/copyright levy on recordable media, the response was not good.
- tensions in our lives that are attacking our minds, unite themselves together to make our consciousness blind - op'ivy
I think it's worth pointing out that the RIAA isn't a government agency, they're a group that represents major record companies and is lobbying the government to turn the law to their favor.
Ok well obviously a singular voice isn't likely to happen, but, should a true singular voice emerge, it would be the ideal situation. The closer a society gets to sharing the same mindset, the better off it is. And I'm not talking control or limited freedom, I'm talking about a purest form democracy, where the elected (not appointed) leader accurately represents the will of the people.
Once upon a time...
My parents used to think I was a lefty because of this issue. They couldn't be convinced of why it should be a right to make your own mp3s/oggs, etc. So I started barraging them with story after story of the media interests being unethical and eventually they understood why I feel the way I do. For my dad, a staunch conservative, the CBDTPA was the real catalyst because of its mandate on the entire computer industry. That's when he said enough is enough, the media cartels are socialist parasites.
Click here or a puppy gets stomped!
Right now, it's sort of like this huge country, with stores, residents, jobs, basic laws etc... but no real government to speak of
What? You want to change this? Why?
Right now, many things are illegal, but the laws are deemed unfair, so these things are socially acceptable
Damn straight. And once those absurd laws are gone things will balance out.I don't want the internet to speak with a singular voice. What a horrible thought. That would turn it into network TV or a clear channel radio station.
If Mr. Edison had thought smarter he wouldn't sweat as much. --Nikola Tesla
Make sure to write your representatives. It's the only recourse we have left in this 'democracy' that has gone afoul - The only reason it has gone afoul is that WE (American Citizens, not slashdotters) have allowed it to but NOT writing our representatives. Their title 'REPRESENTative' should say it all. Their SOLE purpose is to represent YOUR opinion to the people that make the laws that govern how our lives are lived. If you don't write - LAWS WON'T CHANGE. The EFF has made this task incredibally easy - They've even written a nice letter and will auto-lookup your representative based on your address. Get your opinion out there. It's our only chance to change the laws of the land we live in.
I'll give you the link again in case you missed it the first time.
Don't Tread on Me
By legislating standards by which fair-use impaired proudcts are created, aren't we then giving fair-use impaired products our blessing?
Music wants to be free.
Here's a link to a PDF version of the bill on the HoRep's website (It's H.R. 107 in the 108th Congress): Proposed bill. Of interest is what the last two pages have (the rest is just deliniating what mislabeling of a copy-protected disk is and punishable for) -- while it goes in the right direciton for fair uses, it still leaves open the question of "significant noninfringing use" of a hardware/software product, getting us right back to the VHS case. Also, interestingly enough, note the header on the PDF file: it's based off an XML document, apparently, so I wonder how much Boucher's office has adopted to technology, or if the HoReps now has a nice XML/DocBook type of technology for building up new bills.
"Pinky, you've left the lens cap of your mind on again." - P&TB
"I can see my house from here!" - ST:
Spencer Bachus, my representative, is also cosponsoring the bill. This is a real turnaround for him, as he has usually voted for whichever side of the issue is commercial. We've had several e- and snail mail arguments about electronic freedom issues, and his cosponsorship of this bill demonstrates that he is doing just what his job title indicates - representing.
A big attaboy to my man Bachus for pitching in on this! Let this be an inspiration to anyone else out there who believes that getting involved is hopeless - if you speak, they will listen.
Originally, fascism was the unification of the government and business. While the Communists nationalized industry, the fascists left it in private hands but supported it with the government.
The RIAA, and other business groups looking for help really want our government to slowly become a bit more fascist.
Such a shame that few people understand and respect liberty, and are willing to eliminate personal liberty to do what they think is right. The GOP tends to slip towards fascism when they run out of ideas, the Democrats slip towards socialism... the Libertarians speak out for liberty, but they keep letting cooks talk...
Alex
One of the points they mention in their act is the modification of the DMCA so that it allows copy protection to be broken for fair use purposes.
I vaguely recall, during one of the DVD cases, that it was stated in court that the DMCA does NOT forbid breaking copy protection for fair use at the moment.
The PROBLEM is that it forbids distribution of tools for breaking copy protection, regardless of what they will be used for. Having permission to break the protection for fair use is no good unless you are actually able to do it, and unless the tools are distributable very few people who wish to make fair use will be able to.
This is exactly the problem that came up in one of the appeals in the DVD case; that it is not sufficient to simply ensure that people are permitted to make fair use, because even if they have permission, "nothing in law obligates manufacturers to make it easy for people to exercise fair use rights" (paraphrased from the appeal verdict). Thus, they can simply make it so hard that the vast majority of people can't do it, and the tools distribution clause will prevent people who CAN do it from helping others do so.
To ensure fair use, the proposed act would have to include a specification that no IP owner must unduly impede the exercise of fair use rights, technologically or otherwise. If technology is too restricted at the moment to do this without losing protection against illegal use then, well, they're big companies with big bucks: they can innovate new technology, or at least sponsor others to do so. (At the moment, such technology is unlikely to ever get developed because it's actually to the firms' advantage for it not to be - they can carry on getting away with blocking everything.)
Good question. There are two answers.
First, the Philips/Sony "CD/CompactDisk" logo (used under license) is an indication of complience to certain standards that do not support such crippled disks. To use that logo on a crippled disk is (a) a violation of the logo license (according to Philips, at least), and (b) fraud.
This leads to the second answer. You may be asking, "Yes, but how exactly is it deceitful?". The consumer did not contract as to what that logo meant, so why should the supplied be held to that standard? The law generally deals with what "a reasonable person" would understand, in the absence of a specific agreement (contract). After years of purchasing unencumbered CDs, a "reasonable person" would assume that something that looks like a CD, is labeled as a CD, is sold as a CD, is, in fact, a CD, as he understands it, i.e. unencumbered. The logo, in fact, is meant to butress this understanding. Selling a crippled CD without labelling to indicate that it is crippled is fraud, pure and simple. Even if the "CD/compacd disk" logo were missing, you could probably argue sucessfully that it is fraud, simply because "a reasonable person" will presume a shiny flat disk with music on it is a CD, in the absence of anything to suggest otherwise.
The danger, though, is that "a reasonable person" may not know just how encumbered or unencumbered certain future media are, and so will will be oblivious to the fact that his fair use rights are eroded further and further over time. CDs just came at a juncture where digital copying was still difficult enough that digital piracy wasn't a big issue, so little protection. DAT decks, if you recall, had to have SCMS: Serial Copy Managament System, which permitted only one copy from a digital source -- the watermarking alternative pushed by the RIAA in Congress stalled DAT introduction in th U.S. to the point that consumer DAT technology was stillborn.
You could've hired me.