Slashdot Mirror


IEEE Wants Congress To Re-Examine DMCA

softsign writes "Reading this story in this month's IEEE The Institute, I found that IEEE-USA quietly published two position papers asking the US Congress to re-examine and/or clarify sections of the DMCA last year. The papers - developed by the organization's Intellectual Property committee - specifically cite concerns over the chilling effects and misuse of the DMCA against researchers and ISPs. Initially, the IEEE was pretty wishy-washy about the DMCA, but it seems that they've been listening to their members and have developed a pretty strong anti-DMCA, pro-innovation stance. Including an enlightened view on Fair Use rights!"

26 of 185 comments (clear)

  1. bout time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

    major publicity needs to be made on this topic man cnnn needs to run headlines on it

  2. somebody please enlighten me by The+Other+White+Boy · · Score: 3, Interesting

    i may be confused, but the only IEEE acronym i know of ... doesnt seem like it'd have anything to do with this. I'll assume that its good news, but could someone please fill me in? and if its the only IEEE i know of, do they really have any sort of position to influence this or will it just be brushed aside?

    1. Re:somebody please enlighten me by stratjakt · · Score: 4, Interesting

      No, IMO they're doing this because the DMCA can and will be used by moneyed corporations to keep the IEEE from coming up with standards like the IEEE 1394 cable that you plug your videocam in with.

      If everytime they get to work on another standard or protocol, some corporation 'unleashes the hounds' while waving a copy of the DMCA in the air claiming sovereignty over the technology, and its pretty much the end of this group.

      --
      I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
  3. What if by Troll+Garou · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Okay, this is a troll account, but I'll bite.

    Consider this : what if the DMCA was only a way to buy time ? They needed time to compute the impact of internet access to their existing business model. Damn, some customers of mine oppose arguments stronger than theirs to delay migration and observe the behavior of the new system.

    Don't be fooled. They don't want a revolution, and they never did. They are just buying time and brainstorming.

    'Cause they already did a mistake. Remember the new economy ? Now they wait and watch and prepare their next move.

    Fair enough.

    1. Re:What if by SurgeonGeneral · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Well I think there is something to this, however I have read a lot of studies that indicate piracy does not detract from corporate profits whatsoever. In fact it makes them grow because the ability for users to hear an artist inspires them to support them (at least they think they are by buying the CD). Piracy promotes numerous smaller artists.

      The proof is in the pudding:
      Sony is one of the world's largest producers of music, and is one of the largest manufacturers of CD copying/producing hardware. This would be a conflict of interest if cd copying had any effect on sales.

      My theory is that if companies can sell to the politicians the idea that they are losing money on CDs (which they do by donating large sums of money to their campaigns), then they can get laws passed like say, oh I dont know, levies on the sale of blank CDs, CD copying software, and MP3 players. In Canada these levies (at the bare minimum) double the price of the purchase.

      --
      -- "Man is born free, and everywhere he is in chains." Jean Jacques Rousseau
  4. IEEE has pull with Congress? by Cyclometh · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I really doubt that Congress, who won't listen to the majority of its citizens, will bother to listen to a collection of scientists that don't provide any money to their campaign coffers.

    After all, the RIAA and MPAA can probably outspend the IEEE by about 500 to one or more.

    I hate to be too cynical, but this seems to be a lot of sound and fury, signifying nothing to anyone who isn't a geek.

  5. Still pretty "wishy-washy" by cbuskirk · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Coupled with the Unpatriotic Act the DMCA is a blueprint for the end of our country. Organizations like IEEE should be taking a much stronger stance against the DMCA. They should have no profit motive and should be charged with the duty to futher computing, not corprate greed. Granted the individuals who make up the various standards commities on the IEEE have shareholders to pretend to answer to, but the core mission of the IEEE should be offended by the blatent Un-American nature of the DMCA and take a stand, just as every true patriot should take a stand against the so called Patriot Act.

  6. We Have to Start Somewhere... by lasmith05 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It's good to see respected organizations like the IEEE speaking out against the problems of the DMCA. If we can keep the pressure on, the politicians will not be able to ignore the populace.

    --
    www.samuraidreams.com - My Blog
    www.samuraifiles.com - Get Some Videos Here
  7. More help in high places by elflet · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Not only has the IEEE jumped on the bandwagon, but we're likely to find a sympathetic ear in the FCC. This story profiles the new head of the FCC (Michael Powell, who is General Colin Powell's son):
    Powell, 39, will help craft the rules of the road to a new digital promised land, where the lines between computers and entertainment devices blur and consumers have access to a vast array of new services. A die-hard Republican free-marketeer, he aims to do so with as little government intrusion as possible.
    It seems that an overly restrictive DMCA would get in the way of his plans as well, and he's well received on Capital Hill.
  8. Civil disobedience is better by argoff · · Score: 4, Interesting


    The problem isn't the DMCA, but that the era of copyrights is over and people, especially in the entertainment industry, can't deal with it. I think civil disobedience of copyrights whenever possible (like people are doing now) is a much more effective way. It will force change from the outside and not the inside. It will get the problem at the root.

    1. Re:Civil disobedience is better by argoff · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Let me put this straight, just because an institution calles something a right doesn't mean that it is. This is as true with calling copyrights a right today as it was in the 1850's when controlling slaves was called a property right. Rights are not about controll, but liberties. But copyrights are about controll, and the DMCA is about taking actions to secure that form of controll - and now people act supprised when all of a sudden their liberties start disapearing. Sorry, but this wouldn't happen if copyrights were a true right, and neither would the infinite extensions. True rights don't have expirations, phony ones or otherwise.

      And the EULA is not a contract, and copyrights are not an enforcement. Since when did contract law become binging on 3rd parties who don't even agree with it? this is exactly what copyrights do. And what if someone sent you $100 in an envelope that said on the outside "by opening this I have the right to send thugs over and collect $200 in interest from you and your friends that you share it with" - this is fradulent contract law in any other context.

    2. Re:Civil disobedience is better by Reziac · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Hmm. Let me try:

      Owning property [copyrights] is not a bad thing. Acquiring more property [more copyrights] isn't a bad thing either.

      But putting a gun to someone else's head and telling them that because you own property, they can't own anything [because you own a copyrighted work, no one else can fair-use it] is bad. The DMCA is the gun in this scenario.

      Lousy analogy, but it's what came to mind when I read your post. (Sure, blame the parent poster :)

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    3. Re:Civil disobedience is better by slymole · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Let me know when you find a few people who are willing to spend a year - or even a night - in jail for the sake of their fair use rights. Then we can talk about a campaign of civil disobedience.

      Also, civil disobedience means being prepared: you have to study up on the law you're about to take on, and be absolutely certain that you want to commit to opposing this one piece of legislation over others (you cannot at once fight ALL oppresive laws by yourself). Be sure to read up on the subject (Thoreau's "Civil Disobedience" is a good start) and it's previous practitioners. Also, be prepared to deal with the consequences: aligning yourself in direct defiance of the state is a sure way to inflame it's proponents and incite non-official (but tacitly approved) retribution in most any part of the world. Try to align yourself with similar minded people. If you survive all this and your actions have an effect, be ready to enter into politics!

      PS: To return to the subject, do not forget that IEEE is also a guild, not a samaritan organization to help downloaders, and aims chiefly to further the well-being of it's members. That's why it has a larger hope of succeeding against RIAA/MPAA, because it's yet another powerful lobby.

      --
      "We don't stop playing games because we grow old; we grow old because we stop playing games.."
  9. Don't be so sure by 91degrees · · Score: 4, Interesting

    After all, the RIAA and MPAA can probably outspend the IEEE by about 500 to one or more.

    Don't be so sure.

    The IEEE not only has a large number of fairly wealthy engineers, but it also has some very wealthy corporate members such as Intel, and the rest of the semiconductor industry. Chips are in everything. I know I have a few in my car, all my media and computer equipment, my mobile phone, my cordless answerphone, my watch, and my credit card. These people don't want to have to spend money on adding a chips to prevent piracy. Especially when they know it isn't going to work.

    1. Re:Don't be so sure by vsprintf · · Score: 3, Interesting

      First, it's not the IEEE leading the fight, it's the IEEE-USA which is a regional organization. The IEEE, which controls the money, has none. The IEEE's bloated directorship has squandered the organization's revenue and led it to near paralysis. The smaller subsections or societies finally demanded an outside review of organization management and policies.

      The review condemned the current state of affairs, but unless something is done about it, the IEEE will remain moribund and ineffective.

  10. History Repeats Itself by Exitthree · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Perhaps someone else has made this analogy before, but I've never seen it.

    I was just thinking of the similarities of today's copyright infrigement and corporate behemoths exploting the working class with the old day's mills and bosses controlling labor. Basically in both instances people became fed up with the situation. Back then, people started to protest and organize unions, while at the same time the corporations and bosses would pass out black-lists of violators and make a fuss when people wanted fair pay. Today we have file-swapping and MP3s becuase we are sick of paying too much money for something; things (MP3s in particular) where the original author doesn't profit so much as the recording label. Again, the corporations are making a fuss, and instead of black-lists, they are suing the pants off anyone they can find.

    Now, I doubt that the government will legalize file-sharing like they protected unions, but I hope something just as amiable is devised for our current situation. Anyone new that decides to fight is a step in the right direction.

    1. Re:History Repeats Itself by argoff · · Score: 5, Interesting

      how about this...

      in the 1850's they called slavery a property, rather than a form of controll; today they call copyrights a form of property

      in the 1850 they thought that the entire purpose of the industrial revolution was to use inventions like the cotton gin to expand the size of their plantations for unlimited controll and profit. Today people think the information age is about using the internet to leverage their copyright holdings for infinite and unlimited reach.

      "I have no incentive to grow cotton without slaves", "freeing slaves is common theivery", "the great wealth of the plantation system show's it's goodness", "I put effort into getting them slaves" sould alot like "artists have no incentive to create ... etc" , "copying is piracy", and "the great financial success of the movie and software industries is owed to copyrights". etc...

      And how about the market crash of the 1850's when all sorts of experimental business ventures involving industrial technology crashed. (dot com bust?)

      even a civil war happened next, today we have a war on terrorisim?

    2. Re:History Repeats Itself by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting
      Mod parent up to the max. His equation of slavery and copyrights is spot on (the real quandry between the different political perspectives concerns property rights. To wit: communism and capitalism. The former thought nothing was property while the latter considers the physical to be property but the intellectual not to be -- that's why we have copyright laws).

      even a civil war happened next, today we have a war on terrorisim?


      Exactly. The revolution is coming. Terrorism is the only way we can express our view points. Welcome to Fight Club.
    3. Re:History Repeats Itself by MisterSquid · · Score: 2, Interesting

      /. user tonyhill (above) gets it exactly right, but lest his argument go ignored by the muddle-headed . . .

      Slavery was an economic system that had at its center the oppression of a group of people based on birthright. It was a system of production that deprived people of their most fundamental rights to self-determination.

      Copyrights do not deprive anyone of their most fundamental rights to self-determination except in those cases where persons are prosecuted for copyright violation and jailed. Even then, this is not a determination made at birth. Copyright law is not really about morality and human self-determination in the same way that slavery as property right was.

      As for your suggestion that the war on terrorism can be compared to the Civil War, let me suggest you read some history, pronto. The Civil War threatened to sunder the political integrity of a nation-state because factions on one of two sides disagreed whether slavery was an economic or a moral problem (turns out it was both).

      The war on terrorism is not in response to copyright law and, furthermore, is really cover for executive saving face (can't find Osama) and inflating oil prices (wartime scarcity).

      Oh, and by the way, may I have a hit of what you've been smoking 'cause that shit must be good.

      --
      blog
  11. I wish... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    that the blighters in Congress would do the job right in the first place. Then RE-examination would probably not be necessary. Instead they did the job they were paid for. And I don't mean their salaries.

    Do anon cowards always get rated ZERO?

    If so, Slashdot sucks!

  12. Give up trying to negotiate with Congress by ShatteredDream · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Two years ago I brought basic concerns about misuse of patent law and the DMCA to my Congressman, Goodlatte (R-VA). He said that I was either a thief or advocated stealing because I opposed his bill and that a lot of technical people did too. You see, they don't care what the actual coders think, they care what corporations and unions' leaders think.

    Stop acting like Congress represents you. It gets auctioned off every year and CFR isn't going to fix it. It is the 2-party system that is to blame. Even if you outlawed bribery on the pain of death under our current system you'd see no meaningful change. It is because only the best looking and/or most ruthless people get into office.

    I'm a CS student and a regular voter and supporter of the LP and 85% of its positions (I only disagree on its espionage and immigration policies, I support the CIA and believe immigration should be heavily restricted). I was talking the other day with probably the only girl in our department who genuinely "gets it" with coding. She's better than most of the guys and we were talking about politics and she said agreed that universal democracy is a bad idea. She said that most of the women she knows that voted for Clinton in 92 did so because he was the sexiest candidate and she said that in her opinion such idiots should be disenfranchised.

    Most geeks don't understand political people. I have been around enough of them and have been drug into political conversations enough to know exactly how they think. Invariably political people tend to be scumbags. They practically get off on social and political discussions and yet they have no real desire or capacity as a general rule to effect positive change.

    I am a semi-Stalinist Socialist-turned-Libertarian. I learned from history that only **one** system of government works for a long time and that's a Liberal republic. Liberalism is the key to the salvation of the human race and that's what both conservatives and leftists cannot understand. The Liberalism of Locke, Friedmon and co. is an experiment in true civilization. Stop bitching about how Bush and co. undermine democracy. Fuck democracy. You want to see real democracy unleashed on a nation? Read up on Socrates' last days on this Earth. The summaray execution of Socrates by committee for his beliefs is the true face of democracy. It is as vile and vicious as any communist or fascist government that has ever existed. Be concerned about your natural rights, the rights that are inherent to your being a human being such as your right to own property, speak freely, defend yourself and be secure in your home and person. I would rather live under a benevolent dictatorship such as a platonic republic that respects my rights than a democratic system that lets "the people" get whatever they want.

    Democracy doesn't work. The average person doesn't have the intellectual maturity and education to wield the political power that is the vote. I would rather lose my right to vote and know that my representative truly is a peer than have an aristocrat lord over me like I'm a sheep that needs to be herded. Excuse the hell out of me, Congress, but I know more about computers than all of you combined. If our representatives were chosen at random from the bourgiouse then we'd have representatives who could actually relate to us and would see us as equals. We'd also have a system where they don't have to take shit off of us or special interests and can do the right thing. Choose them at random from the bourgiouse, give them one term in office and if they take bribes lynch them from the nearest tree in DC.

    1. Re:Give up trying to negotiate with Congress by skinnydskitzo · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I wrote my congresswoman, Sue Myrick, a republican from Charlotte, the second largest banking town in the US and a huge pool of ultraconservative cash...in regards to the consumer broadband act, and she vowed to vote in favor of my opinion, and take the consumer side instead of that of the corporations..point being, there are some decent people in public office, few and far between, but there are nonetheless.

  13. No Way! by famazza · · Score: 2, Interesting

    DMCA won't be examined neither clarified, there are too many interests involved in keeping the law the way it is.

    There's no way to beat RIAA/MPAA lobby, I can't believe that IEEE have enough money to buy more congressmen than they. So we'll have to wait until RIAA/MPAA find out that the world has changed and decides to adapt to the new reality (just like we all have to do in our lives).

    --

    -=-=-=-=
    I know life isn't fair, but why can't it ever be un-fair in MY favor!?
  14. Re:great... by vsprintf · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Initially, the IEEE was pretty wishy-washy about the DMCA, but it seems that they've been listening to their members and have developed a pretty strong anti-DMCA, pro-innovation stance. Including an enlightened view on Fair Use rights!"

    ...which they quietly published in two position papers. Pardon me for being a wet blanket, but I'll wait until some organization makes the case by loudly publishing a position paper before I start cheering.

    Agreed. I also think the poster of the article was somewhat confused. I am a member of both the IEEE and the IEEE-USA since it is the regional organization for U.S. residents. The links in the article are to IEEE-USA pages or the linked articles refer to IEEE-USA positions. IEEE, the parent organization, will remain wishy-washy as always. The only time it takes a position is when IEEE-USA offends someone (like the time it opposed H-1B increases), and the IEEE slapped them down and told them to shut up. IEEE-USA has a new president who hasn't been slapped down yet.

  15. Re:About as much pull as the AFL-CIO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting
    The IEEE is not a union. It's much, much more than that.

    For one thing, they don't negotiate contracts with employers on behalf of their members...

    I believe it's the oldest professional engineering organization in the world in existence today. They are responsible for dozens upon dozens of scholarly research journals spanning power engineering to computer science. They are an international standards body (they publish the standards for Ethernet, Firewire, etc, etc...). Most importantly in this case, they have MAJOR corporate participation.

    When it comes to public policy with regards to technology, IEEE is one of the big dogs on the block.

  16. Let your rejoice of victory be heard by paroneayea · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Often times news such as this creates only slight interest, as the war against the DMCA has not yet seen a complete victory. But is not each battle won in a war indeed still a victory? Should we not still celebrate this small step? Our cries of satisfaction over that which we approve are indeed just as important as our groans of disgust over that which we disapprove (which we seem to be much more willing to display). For you see, this is more than just encouragement amongst us geeks; it piques the curiosity of others, for they shall wonder why we rejoyce as we do. Not all, but surely some, shall investigate, and many shall join our cause. And our cry shall become louder.
    Thus I encourage you to join me in whooping, hollering, and just plain happily ranting about how this wonderful event when in the accompanyment of others. Believe it or not, in doing so you are helping to win yet another battle.

    --
    http://mediagoblin.org/