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."
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
if you want to listen to a preview, listen to the radio That's the problem. >90% of music never gets on to the radio because radio is under the control of the music "industry". If your band isn't one of the few being promoted this month you cannot get on the radio.
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.
True, but unless something like this passes, we won't have a chance to know which discs are crippled. Personally I am already voting with my wallet. Since I got the first crippled album that wouldn't play in my computer's CD burner at the time (the only CD player I had) back in 2000, I haven't bought a single CD, since there is no way to know which ones are broken.
I for one welcome our new SCOviet Russian overlords to whom all our base are belong.
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]
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.
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
we should vote with our wallets and not buy copy protected music CD's
This is about more than just CD labels, it's about regulations on both production and fair use.
I had a big discussion with some friends the first time this bill was introduced. My friend is a liberitarian who thought we should not be introducing new industry regulations (forced labeling) in music.
I disagree with that argument for 2 reasons. Fist of all, crippled discs that are not labeled are basically illegal anyway since they are being falsely advertized as regular CDs. This may be a new regulation, but it is a reedundant and minor 1.
Secondly, the main focus of the bill is on deregulation (and thus should appeal to liberitarians). The DMCA currently prohibits consumers from 'unencrypting' crippled CDs. It also prohibits production of hardware or software that breaks cpoyright encryption on these CDs. This bill will remove those regulations.
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
Actually Holland has a long and dismal history of protecting all sorts of cartels and anti-consumer practices, with affected markets ranging from telephony and books to odd things like prayer candles and onions. It has only been a few years since the Nederlandse Mededingingsautoriteit (the Dutch cartel watchdog) is trying to put a stop to that. There is actually little legislation in Holland to protect consumers, perhaps they even have less rights than in the US.
On top of that, we will have to deal increasingly with directives from the European Commission. This body is (sadly) of low democratic alloy. John Q Public does not have easy access to them, or even have a say in who sits in that committee, but you can be sure that industry lobbyists have found their way to these people.
But I agree, it is very good to see politicians look at the current laws and proposals with different eyes, and asking "Where are the consumer rights in all of this?".
If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
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.
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.)