Anti-Piracy Labeling Bill in Works

Rinisari writes "Just posted on news.com.com is an article with more on the bill that could make all digital consumer products be required to be labeled with information regarding any anti-piracy technology within the device. Senator Ron Wyden, D-OR, will be the primary sponser of the bill (he's also got a text-only site)."

Comments

Actually..

[mindstrm]

it says he is "close" to releasing a bill that "might" require labeling.

Re:Actually..

[devaldez]

Waaaayyyy better than is colleague in Oregon, Gordon Smith, who appears to be the next RIAA/MPAA supporter.

Maybe Wyden will rub off on Smith...until then, bombard Smith with anti-MPAA/RIAA mail and informed information. Perhaps we can get a convert in the form of the Senior Senator from the state of Oregon.

Re:Actually..

[Obliterous]

until then, bombard Smith with anti-MPAA/RIAA mail and informed information

How about You just leave out the anti-whatever E-mail?

And dont bombard him, bombarding someone just ensures that they take shelter from your bombardment.

Instead, try and educate the man. present an UNBIASED viewpoint and use FACTS.
if you flood the man with propoganda, he's just going to run to the MPAA/RIAA money even faster.

Tell His constituents what he's doing, and EDUCATE THEM!

Take an inteligent aproach, and he MIGHT listen to you.

And for you residents of Oregon, Call His office, send him mail (NOT E-mail), Tell him what you think of his actions, and be sure your vote reflects your opinion the next time he comes up for election.

Act like a freak/fanatic, and he will respond to you accordingly.

Act like an inteligent person, and he might actually listen to you.

Re:Actually..

[devaldez]

While I generally agree in principle with your recommendations, having spoken with the man, I can tell you that he has a very focused opinion that is not to be confused with facts or reasonable discussion.

Politicians who are focused and supportive of certain industries are generally ruled by hype and money...if you only have considered opinions and no capital, you are welcome to express yourself and will in no way influence these folks.

On other issues the Senior Senator is considered and thoughtful, even erudite and reasonable. In this place, he has been won over by the RIAA/MPAA twins to believe that if he doesn't protect their content, then he will compromise all intellectual property derived in the US. It is an argument that will not be won except by the voice of his constituents.

As a citizen of Oregon, I can tell you I've seen far more responsive government representatives from Arizona (still have the letter from John McCain where he corrected my beliefs about his encryption legislation) than from Oregon.

I won't recommend voting against a candidate for a single issue, but I do believe that we must make it clear to him the nature of his misinformation, and if that includes sending him snail mail and discussing these at town meetings at every opportunity, then I will...

Never suggested being a freak/fanatic, but I can see how I mis-communicated my thoughts.

Re:Actually..

[Anonymous Coward]

Take an inteligent aproach, and he MIGHT listen to you.

When taking the intelligent approach, be sure to spell check your letter before sending it to your senator.

Re:Actually..

[indiigo]

Actually, I'm from Oregon, and Wyden responds personally to e-mail with constructive comments.

Re:Actually..

[Ontopic]

And dont bombard him, bombarding someone just ensures that they take shelter from your bombardment.

Do bombard him! But bombard him with pro MPAA/RIAA mail, so that he gets pissed off at that viewpoint...

Re:Actually..

[The Cydonian]

And for you residents of Oregon, Call His office,

Never thought Oregon was heaven on earth, unless of course, He has opened branch offices all over the world.

Re:Actually..

[Patrick Lewis]

Not that it really matters, but Wyden is the Senior Senator in Oregon. Wyden defeated Smith in 1996 running for Bob Packwood's vacated Senate seat.

Re:Actually..

[devaldez]

In my several cases, he did respond, but his responses were on completely different issues that made him appear very unorganized.

I'm realistic enough to know that Wyden and Smith are busy people and cannot hope to repond to their constituents personally every time, but I do expect a certain amount of professionalism from the responsible staff. Thanking me for my mail supporting an agricultural bill when I actually sent a technology concern is clearly a mistake.

Now McCain (certainly his staff, not him) responded to a non constituent with links, facts, discussion of the media distortion of the bill and then encouraged me to read the bill myself...which I should have done before sending my concerns. McCain and his staff were right and I was wrong.

That the Senator from Arizona took the time to constructively address my concerns and provided more detail and direction for even more information...that's the kind of response I want to see from my elected officials in this state.

And I have been corrected that Wyden is the Senoir Senator...

Re:Actually..

[HBergeron]

Maybe Wyden will rub off on Smith...until then, bombard Smith with anti-MPAA/RIAA mail and informed information. Perhaps we can get a convert in the form of the Senior Senator from the state of Oregon.

Actually, Wyden IS the Senior Senator from Oregon

Re:Actually..

[MSenhanced]

I suggest that all slashdotters vote Liberterian and try to raise enough voters to make a difference within their party. Obviously, both sides are corrupt. So don't settle for either, choose a 3rd choice.. better than no voting at all.

Re:Actually..

[Anonymous Coward]

Making a company that is doing evil things, advertise that they are doing them, will never work. There will always be a 'paid for' loophole in the legislation that allows them to screw you over.

Hit this from a different angle.

Get the companies who do not put DRM on their cd's to advertise the fact that they are not restricting your fair use rights. Get them, or an outside group, to label their cd's with a sticker that says: 'Conforms to the Red Book standard' (or whatever) and 'Fair Use Friendly'. And add in a postage paid postcard, that says 'Thanks for sticking up for the consumer, I will support your business in the future'.

Then, not only will companies make more money, they will know why. Because the consumer that notices the sticker, and sends in the postcard, will be giving them positive feedback for doing the right thing. Of course, this is completely separate from the registration/info gathering card they usually put in there too.

CD stores could also get on this bandwagon, by putting the stickers on themselves. There is no reason not to, it will only boost sales of non-restricted albums.

Run with it...

Labeling

[kramer2718]

Wow, to think Tipper Gore has something in common with most /.ers.

Re:Labeling

[OMEGA Power]

The difference is that the Tipper Gore wanted things labelled based on something that is not clearly definded (i.e. what is offensive or innapropriate for children) whereas does this cd have copy-protection is a clear cut technilogical question. In addition it is generally accepted that the ultimate goal of Tipper's group was to force retailers to refuse to sell music marked objectionable to minors whereas copy-prevention labeling would be strictly for the purpose of informing potentional buyers, what they can or can't do with a cd (without cracking the protection, of course).

Re:Labeling

[GMontag]

The difference is . . .

And the similarity is that Communists/Fascists, or any other shade of totalitarian the Political Science Departmet can classify, employ this labelig tactic to force speech on others, just as this fellow is trying to pull.

Re:Labeling

[Anonymous Coward]

And don't forget that labelling was really a compromise. If Tipper had had her way those CD's would have been banned altogether. She is actually the biggest reason I voted against Gore. If you thought Hillary was bad, Tipper is far worse. And don't fool yourself into thinking she has no influence.

Re:Labeling

[Anonymous Coward]

Somebody please translate this post into English. Are you for or against warning labels for defective cd's?

Re:Labeling

[ShadowDrake]

>And the similarity is that Communists/Fascists, or >any other shade of totalitarian the Political >Science Departmet can classify, employ this labelig >tactic to force speech on others, just as this >fellow is trying to pull.

Take off the tin-foil hat!

This is more of a consumer-protection law than anything else. It's reasonable to expect the dealer/manufacturer notify you (and discount appropriately) when he tries to sell you known broken goods. Wouldn't you be a bit ticked if the CD burner you bought was used as a hammer by the store manager's kid, without any notice about it?

Copy-protection is making a product broken the moment it comes out of the factory. Note it as damage.

Re:Labeling

[GMontag]

Wouldn't you be a bit ticked if the CD burner you bought
was used as a hammer by the store manager's kid, without any notice about it?

This is nothing of the sort, you know it, I know it and this populist grandstander is pulling another watered down Gore/McCarthy stunt.

Nobody expects a Yugo, the zenith of Communist cosumer goods, to be able to keep up with a tricked out CJ-7 in a hill climb. If people market products WITHOUT "copy protection" (a misnomer at best) and LABEL THOSE ACCURATELY AND VOLUNTARILY then that is fine by me.

Apparently YOU need a nanny.

Re:Labeling

[killthiskid]

Hmm... I would liken this more to a label that warns you, 'yes, this car has an air bar', or 'no, this car does not have air bags.' Or maybe, 'yes, this VCR has the ability to record'... anyway, it's not subjective. It is a boolean value... yes or no, true or false, etc... something you could find out by looking at the package, in this case, they just want to make it very obvious.

Re:Labeling

[Anonymous Coward]

Is it late at night where you are? Your posts are totally unintelligible. Are you saying that a copy protected cd is like a Yugo? Do you think that it is better for people to assume that all cd's are copy protected except for ones that are labeled. I give up. Post when you are more awake.

Re:Labeling

[Neck_of_the_Woods]

I wonder if more than 50% of the people reading this know what a cj-7 is. I think you should have gone for something a little more obscure like say and FJ40.

Re:Labeling

[ClipDude]

Apparently YOU need a nanny.

I don't think that demanding that the products I buy in the store WORK is tantamount to demanding a nanny. When I buy CDs, I want to be able to play them ON MY COMPUTER and whatever other device was designed to play CDs. These copy-protected CDs have been known not to work in some computers, DVD players, and car CD players. Translation: buying them is like playing a crapshoot since you don't know if (a) it will have the anti-copying technology implemented or (b) what devices the CD will play in if it does. Maybe nobody expects a Yugo to hit seventy when climbing a hill, but if my brand-new car randomly didn't start on Sundays and Tuesdays, and it was a manufacturer-imposed limitation, I think I would be entitled to complain.

(Besides, when you buy a car, they do tell you the horsepower of the engine. People buying Yugos do have access to that information.)

I don't demand a nanny. I demand to be warned when someone is trying to rip me off, by selling me products that don't work as advertised.

Re:Labeling

[ShadowDrake]

It is similar. People have certain expectations for what a content-playing device should do. Among these functionalities are reliable playing and *facilitation of copying*. When the functionality is lost, wether it's by smashing the device with a large mallet, or by deliberately neutering the design to appease the RIAA, this is important and worth reporting to the consumer.

>Nobody expects a Yugo, the zenith of Communist >cosumer goods, to be able to keep up with a tricked >out CJ-7 in a hill climb

However, when you offer the Yugo as the next-generation replacement to said CJ-7 (equivalent strategy: let's replace your perfectly good CD player with our NeuteredDisc(tm) players!), and your target market wouldn't be able to tell a Yugo from a CJ-7 at the dealership without two tries (the discs and players look, are packaged and priced similarly, and advertising rarely mentions crippling), you need to make it abundantly clear that you're not selling the same set of expectations.

Finally, the louder and more obnoxious the warning label is, the stronger its impact on discouraging manufacturers to adopt an unpopular technology. Would you put a big "We Screw Our Customers" label on every box, assuming you didn't work at MSFT? The principle here is somewhat similar, I suppose, to the stigma against NC/17-rated films shaping the supply side of the market: you can make them if you want, but good luck getting the consumer to look behind the scarlet letters.

Re:Labeling

[Anonymous Coward]

i dont mind the tipper gore label much, the biggest problem that i have is how to define a number of those things that would be labeled, what qualifies for the label.

but in the end, its not censorship by anymeans. its clarifying the content. if it is deemed necessary to require warnings, then its necessary. but basically i dont think music is corrupting our youth, read "oh wont someone think of the children" i think she should do something useful. music isnt corrupting our youth, our leaders are.

Re:Labeling

[DEBEDb]

Analogies are crap.

You can test drive a car.

Can you test drive a CD?

Re:Labeling

[Ontopic]

Would you put a big "We Screw Our Customers" label on every box, assuming you didn't work at MSFT?

No, because MSFT might sue for trademark infringment if you wrote "Microsoft" on a perfectly working product. Maybe they would tolerate it is the product was a vacuum cleaner...

Re:Labeling

[Anonymous Coward]

If Tipper had had her way those CD's would have been banned altogether. She is actually the biggest reason I voted against Gore. If you thought Hillary was bad, Tipper is far worse.

... and Lynne Cheney is worse again.

Whew..

[Anonymous Coward]

For a second, I thought they meant "pro-piracy". I was wondering if this would require Adaptec to start shipping copies of EZ CD Creator Pro letting consumers know that "WARNING, THIS APPLICATION CAN LET YOU COPY YOUR ELITE H4CKED COPY OF MSWORD ONTO CD-R'S! PURCHASE AT YOUR OWN RISK!"

Re:Whew..

[SUB7IME]

I think that 'pro-piracy' would force Adapted to start 'accidentally' posting their software to low-speed, poor-reliability public ftp servers, running on port 31337.

Then again, maybe the government meant that they were going to start hoisting the black flag and slitting throats on the high seas. You never know...

Not a bad idea

[dreamchaser]

On the face of things, this sounds like a good step. Companies are certainly free to incorporate DRM or other anti-piracy features, but consumers should be equiped with all the information they need to make a sound choice. That will make it easier for people to vote with their wallets.

Unfortunately, it probably won't stop most of the unwashed masses from buying the latest [fill in the name of the flavor du 'jour] CD.

Re:Not a bad idea

[xylon]

I was at HMV the other day, and had an option of two CDs I wanted to buy. One was Massive Attack - 100th Window, and the other Nick Cave - Nocturama. I figured, since I'd already heard Nocturama, and hadn't heard 100th Window, I'd get the latter. That is, until I saw the Copy Protection sticker on the back of the CD Case, after which I put it down, and bought Nick Cave instead.

Of course, had there been no copy protection sticker/warning, I would probably have ended up with 100th Window (it was cheaper!). It's good to know, certainly - I don't want a crippled CD that may or may not play in my computer, cd player, dvd player, whatever; let's hope all recording labels follow suit.

Re:Not a bad idea

[Anonvmous Coward]

"ompanies are certainly free to incorporate DRM or other anti-piracy features, but consumers should be equiped with all the information they need to make a sound choice."

Just to add to that, I think it'd force companies to charge less money for restricted (I hate the word protection in this context) materials. I won't buy a Music CD that won't work in my computer. But if the restricted CD were say $5 less, well then I'd consider it.

It's a pity, these corps have a wonderful opportunity here to gain user acceptance of crippled CD's.

"We're doing this to thwart piracy in order to make our business more profitable. As a pre-emptive reward, we're lowering the price of our products. Support anti-piracy steps, and we'll pass some of the savings on to you."

Yeah, I know, it's not likely to happen. But a price drop for those particular materials would let people vote with their wallets. "So... we lowered the price of CD's and made more money, weird. But, this album isn't restricted and it made a greater profit, wow."

Re:Not a bad idea

[EverDense]

So Massive Attack feel its OK for them to "sample" other people.
BUT we can't "sample" them.

Hypocrites!
...and don't give me that "Its the record company doing it" bullshit.

Re:Not a bad idea

[Guppy06]

"But if the restricted CD were say $5 less, well then I'd consider it."

You know, DivX movies were quite a bit cheaper than normal DVDs...

Re:Not a bad idea

[Anonvmous Coward]

"You know, DivX movies were quite a bit cheaper than normal DVDs..."

So? Crippled CD's aren't going to be pay per play like DivX DVD's were.

Re:Not a bad idea

[cheinonen]

Yeah, since I rip every single CD I own to my mp3 server, then burn a copy so my original never leaves my 301 disc changer, I had issues with them copy protecting their new CD. It was easy to find a copy on newsgroups, though, so someone figured out how to get around it. Maybe I'll pick up a copy protection free vinyl copy.

Re:Not a bad idea

[dead sun]

Unfortunately, it probably won't stop most of the unwashed masses from buying the latest [fill in the name of the flavor du 'jour] CD.

Well, considering how well labeling cigarettes has worked to prevent people from giving themselves cancer, just because it's cool, I'm guessing that labels on crippled anti-piracy will have about as much of an effect.

Of course, if we could get a lawsuit going against companies that cripple their products, win many millions and have some of that money mandated to be used against the companies we just won it from we could be just like the anti-tobacco people. However, I'm not sure the big tobacco companies have done anything to prevent cancerous side-effects of smoking, either. So maybe that isn't the best plan in the world.

Re:Not a bad idea

[Anonymous Coward]

But if the restricted CD were say $5 less, well then I'd consider it.

Of course you would, and so would everyone else.

Everyone would but copy-restricted CD's. The people who want to exercise their fair-use rights to make backups/spaceshift their media can't. Meanwhile the pirates will crack the copy-prevention and keep breaking the law anyway.

Re:Not a bad idea

[MrFreshly]

What we really need here is an authentication system like M$ and/or Battlenet uses for DRM but for other media like audio and video. It worked well for the Circuit City Divex adventure. :) As always: if you can play it, you WILL be able to copy it. IMHO, if you put out a good product at a fair price, most people wont mind paying for it. If you try to protect it, the protection is or WILL be circumventable anyway - and it will NOT deter someone from copying it. It'll just piss off those of us who want to use it legitimately and give others something to do (crack). We'd all be happier about paying less and getting more - or at least not laying out the cash for crap products.

Re:Not a bad idea

[Anonymous Coward]

I think it'd force companies to charge less money for restricted (I hate the word protection in this context) materials. (emp. mine)

Like, if Trojan started to ship products which were as effective in protecting, all hell would brake lose?

Re:Not a bad idea

[quahog]

Hmm, I had no troubles ripping my legally purchased copy of 100th Window. Maybe I just haven't listened to all the ripped mp3's yet.

Re:Not a bad idea

[/dev/trash]

They sample and have permission. You on the other hand do not have permission.

Re:Not a bad idea

[liquidsin]

ick. They need permission to sample because they are using copyrighted material (someone else's music) to make money. I shouldn't need a band's "permission" to play the cd I *bought* in my car or my computer or wherever else is convenient for *me*, the guy who purchased their disc.

Re:Not a bad idea

[Swaffs]

If the restricted CD were $5 less, than people might start buying it instead of the more pricey one, and that would cut way further into profits than piracy does. Unless the RIAA actually believes they're losing as much money to piracy as they claim, it won't be worth their while. They just want to take as much as possible, and they can't do that by lowering prices.

Re:Not a bad idea

[AutumnLeaf]

Unless the salesman informs you of the technology by telling you that having DRM interfaces built into you new HDTV set is a good thing because everything will use it in the future (which happened to me the last time I was browsing TVs).

"Oh... if everyone's going to use, good thing I'll have it then! I'll be set for the DIGITAL (rights management) AGE! Yeah Baby!"

Re:Not a bad idea

[trezor]

Whadda you mean?!? Charge less for crippled CDs? They've spent more work and more money making crippled CDs, so they should charge more.

If CDs were sold in a free market that is. However Red-book CDs and (insert $500 million worth of garbage research here)-"protected" CDs cost exactly the same... To some that might seem strange. In a free market.

Re:Not a bad idea

[Feztaa]

I won't buy a Music CD that won't work in my computer. But if the restricted CD were say $5 less, well then I'd consider it.

I wouldn't by a broken CD at any price. I don't have a CD player, I have a computer. And if the CD doesn't work in my computer, then it is a coaster, and should be marketed as such.

Re:Not a bad idea

[Alsee]

I think it'd force companies to charge less money for restricted materials.

You are going to force them to charge LESS for a product that costs them MORE to produce? They have spent a fortune developing, licening, and implementing these restriction systems.

Has it dawned on you that it also implies that you are forcing them to charge MORE for normal CD's?

Even if we assume they initially started by reducing the cost of crippled content they will quickly apply "inflation" and set the price of crippled disks however they want and you are unforcing a surcharge for normal products.

-

About time!

[Anonymous Coward]

It's about time somebody stepped up to the plate. This kind of legislation is necessary if we are to even maintain the concept of consumer rights. How can a consumer make a decision on what to buy if it isn't labelled sufficiently?

Good luck on this bill!

Re:About time!

[absurdhero]

I wonder what the real meat of the bill is (or will end up being). This might just be some candy added in to gain enough support to pass. Situations like this do happen often.

Re:About time!

[Daengbo]

Man -- This is awesome! Can we get this at Panthip Plaza? What we really need in Thailand is a "This is an illegal copy" sticker, because, really, I like to buy he real thing. Anyway, the Prime Ministr has declared that illegal CDs will be stopped by next month. I wonder if they'll shoot them all like they are the drug dealers...

Re:About time!

[Anonymous Coward]

gah. Thailand. sounds like a fun place. Do they shoot first and ask questions later?

Re:About time!

[Anonymous Coward]

Psssst. in Australia the small claims court regularly awards damages againt 'unfit merchandise' deceptably labelled. Bringing a ghetto blaster into court, and a freshly ripped uncrippled copy wins every time. Materials $1, court fees $50,other costs $50.
The old British sales of goods act still has teeth.

Re:About time!

[Daengbo]

(Yes, this is off-topic) Just about. 400 people have been killed in the north. At this point, the police need to only claim that you are dealing drugs to shoot you. They can toss a bag of heroine on you after you're dead if they turn out to be wrong. Any oversight disappeared a month ago. Quite scary.

Re:About time!

[Anonymous Coward]

There will be no candy added, I can assure you.

No Big Deal

[Bueller_007]

At first I thought this was a terrific idea. But you know that the majority of buyers are people who don't understand what the consequences are.

And further, as the technology becomes more and more popular, eventually, won't EVERY product have one of these labels on it?

Although this act seems like it could be a step in the right direction, I think it should be cut down before it wastes (American) tax-payers dollars.

Re:No Big Deal

[OMEGA Power]

Labeling is important (even if it does cost tax payer money) because a person is more likley to not buy a DRMed product because they saw the label then they are to go to the trouble of returing one theyu bought without knowing it was copy-crippled

wtf

[DiSKiLLeR]

WTF.

Maybe i am retarted, but why is news.com now news.com.com ?

Now i get the news.com.com.com.com.com.. joke in an earlier article a few days ago.

That is wierd ;)

D.

Re:wtf

[Anonymous Coward]

You obviously are "retarted."

Re:wtf

[trezor]

I dunno. Mabe news.com was taken, but news.com.com wasn't? It sounds ridiculous but that's the only excuse I would take for such a bad domain :)

Now is the time to use the slashdot effect

[dethl]

Lets give his site hell! Bring it down my fellow /.'ers!

Sounds good to me...

[403Forbidden]

No longer will I waste money on games that I can't blindread into Daemon's tools so I can toss the CD...

I hate ever so much switching CDs.

Just as offensive as "explicit lyrics"

[adzoox]

It's just as offensive to have my "fair use" stripped from me as some lyrics are.

It will also help sell "forward thinking artists" and labels who don't have the label.

Re:Just as offensive as "explicit lyrics"

[Squarewav]

how is fair use striped from you in this case, try reading the article its about putting warning lables on electronics that HAVE drm, so you can make a informed choice when buying electronics, I think its a good idea, if people dont buy the things with drm sticker on them maybe the rria will get a clue

Re:Just as offensive as "explicit lyrics"

[Anonymous Coward]

They take the ability to put the damn cd in your computer and play it. We all know this protection isn't going to fucking matter; which is why its dumb, because they are taking away rights, and when we take the rights back, they take us to court. Anyways, they're all a bunch of cock clappers.

Re:Just as offensive as "explicit lyrics"

[adzoox]

Reading comprehension ain't what it used to be.

Read with understanding. Ribbit Ribbit!

Taken too far.

[$$$$$exyGal]

"I want people to walk into every store in America and see that the product they're about to buy has restrictions ..."

This can be taken pretty far:

"This item cannot be used as a shoe, pair of pants, or candy. If used as any of those devices, Sony is relieved of all responsibilities. This item's only function is as a beer mug."

--sex

Re:Taken too far.

[ObviousGuy]

My Vaio beer mug is leaky. And I can't surf the Interweb anymore.

Re:Taken too far.

[Anonymous Coward]

Hey sexy girl, can you show us yer sex?

I like it

[Hatechall]

See, this kind of thing I think is a lot more benificial then some of the rabit anti-anti-copy thought that has been growing recently. Manufacturers should be allowed to so whatever they want with their product, and on the other side consumers should know what they are getting. No need to start spewing that DRM is evil, just allow everyone the information they need to make a good decision.

Yes, I am aware of the irony of using that case for DRM, for the information people may need to use for good judgement can be hidden using DRM. I believe it is a weak arguement though.

Re:I like it

[NegativeK]

Manufacturers should be allowed to so whatever they want with their product, and on the other side consumers should know what they are getting.

I completely agree. I also think that laws shouldn't be passed regarding this issue. It shouldn't be illegal to break DRM, but it also shouldn't be illegal to put DRM on a disk. When the companies get too greedy and the functionality of their products is lost, they'll feel it in their pocketbook.
Let the consumer decide.

Re:I like it

[Mitreya]

I also think that laws shouldn't be passed regarding this issue. It shouldn't be illegal to break DRM, but it also shouldn't be illegal to put DRM on a disk.

But I don't see anyone passing laws to make DRM illegal. Manufacturers are free to use any form of DRM that they desire. Problem is, 1) they can lie and pass it off as non-DRM product 2) It is is already illegal to break DRM in many cases (at least when DRM owner has enough lawyers).

Re:I like it

[Alsee]

just allow everyone the information they need to make a good decision.

No, you also have to make sure the customer actually has a choice.

This labeling bill could be good, but it should probably also have a provision to focus extra anti-trust attention on those who use these technologies and labels. The simple fact is that an informed customer will not select a crippled product over an equivalent non-crippled product.

The RIAA cartel will simply eliminate the market for non-crippled disks. The Microsoft monopoly will release only a crippled operating system and Microsoft is forcing PC industry to produce crippled computers.

Labeling products to allow consumers to make an informed choice is meaningless if there is only a single choice.

-

Re:I like it

[siskbc]

It shouldn't be illegal to break DRM, but it also shouldn't be illegal to put DRM on a disk.

Two points - we're not talking about making it illegal to use DRM, we're talking about mandatory labeling of their doing it. So really, the right they lose is that of doing DRM *secretly*.

Second, if you oppose labeling, OK - I will too just *as soon* as they make it legal again to defeat DRM.

they'll feel it in their pocketbook. Let the consumer decide

Yeah, but since the music market is controlled by a very few players who are allied by a strong trade group, there won't *be* any choice, nor will they feel it in their pocketbook.

Re:Fucking Democrats

[Fishstick]

Wait, aren't they on our side?

Opponents of Hollywood's drive to strengthen copyright law are mounting a new strategy: Require anything that has antipiracy technology built in to be clearly labeled and let consumers decide at the cash register.

So, they aren't trying to pass a law to require digital copyright protection on devices, they are trying to legislate disclosure of "anti-piracy" technology that might otherwise silently sit on that new CD player you are ready to buy from Circuit City.

Why are we bitching at the Democrats? Oh, because it was on slashdot and the genius editor posted it "from the compromising-freedom dept", so we don't have to actually read the the article before shouting profanities at the "Fucking Democrats".

Re:Fucking Democrats

[Dr. Mojura]

Moron. Did you even read the article? Wait, this is slashdot. The purpose of the bill is to HELP consumers, so they'll clearly know if an item they are purchasing has anti-privacy garbage inside of it. In other words, it's good for us. Like Wheaties.

It's really needed.

[Openadvocate]

Now, when I buy a CD, I expect to be able to use it in my PC and copy the music to my Sony walkman using the program that came with it. If I am in the store and I can't see if I am able to do that, I won't buy it in fear of wasting my money.

Re:It's really needed.

[Chemical]

Is it that Sony Net Walkman? Yuck. You have to encode everything as ATRAC3 and "check in, check out" using their crappy software. No thanks. In fact, I wont buy any Sony MP3 anything for fear that I would have to use some of their check in check out BS. That includes their DVD players, car CD/MP3 players, or whatever else. I advise others to do the same.

iPod and similar devices are really the only way to go. You mount the unit like a file system, and just drag the files over. No re-encoding, no checking the files out. No DRM. Just ease of use and great performance. Sony realizes this, but because of their music devison holding them back, they are stuck with the crappy DRM hassleware.

Also, my Pioneer car deck plays MP3s without any crap. Burn the files onto a regular ISO9660 disc, and you're done. No special software. No proprietary formats. No hassles. I know Sony makes decks that play MP3s, but because of all thier DRM pushing, I would be very skeptical about buying one.

In short, because of Sony Music pushing for DRM, I am probably not going to buy Sony audio electronics again. At one time they were the best, because of Sony Music being scared of their own customers and forcing this lockdown, I'm not even taking a chance with Sony stuff.

Re:It's really needed.

[Guppy06]

Ah, but if it's copy protected, shouldn't the store be more willing to accept opened returns? After all, it's not like you could have copied it...

Re:It's really needed.

[Hellasboy]

Yes, they must take back the CD if it won't work in your player due to "protections".

I purchased a CD from Best Buy 6 months ago and it wouldn't work in my car. It wouldn't have been a problem since I have players in my computers, home theater, etc. But I listen to the majority of my music in my car. I took it back to Best Buy, explained to them that the craptastic "security" measures would not allow me to use the CD in my car. He refused. I spoke to a manager and they agreed to give me store credit.

whatever, that's fine with me. I picked up a CD that actually worked.

damn you macromedia.

Re:It's really needed.

[toriver]

damn you macromedia.

"Whew," said Macrovision, "another missed attack."

Re:It's really needed.

[PhilipMatarese]

Just thought I'd add that my Sony DVD player plays all my mp3 cds (also regular ISO9660 disc) perfectly.

Nice, but...

[creative_name]

This is, IMHO, a pretty nice little bone to throw us geeks. Now we can know even more certainly what we have to circumvent in order to continue on in our fair-use of things we buy. However, it also seems to me that this is a rather toothless movement and is almost a 'bone' thrown to people on both sides of the debate regarding piracy.

Wait, aren't they on "our side"?

[Fishstick]

Opponents of Hollywood's drive to strengthen copyright law are mounting a new strategy: Require anything that has antipiracy technology built in to be clearly labeled and let consumers decide at the cash register.

So, they aren't trying to pass a law to require digital copyright protection on devices, they are trying to legislate disclosure of "anti-piracy" technology that might otherwise silently sit on that new CD player you are ready to buy from Circuit City.

Why are we bitching at the Democrats? Oh, because it was on slashdot and the genius editor posted it "from the compromising-freedom dept", so we don't have to actually read the the article before kicking into full knee-jerk mode.

"I want people to walk into every store in America and see that the product they're about to buy has restrictions," Wyden said. "Let's take this to the marketplace."

Uh, that's what we want, isn't it? (well, short of making the whole copyright BS go away, I mean).

Re:Wait, aren't they on "our side"?

[elmegil]

100% a-right. If we KNOW what DRM is built into the players/media, we can make informed choices and NOT buy the crap that has it. Then the marketplace will make it clear that they will not have their way.

Re:Wait, aren't they on "our side"?

[Jburkholder]

Maybe Chris should change this to

from the give 'em hell dept.

Re:Wait, aren't they on "our side"?

[GMontag]

Why are we bitching at the Democrats? Oh, because it was on slashdot and the genius editor posted it "from the compromising-freedom dept", so we don't have to actually read the the article before kicking into full knee-jerk mode.

Umm, no the issue is at the core of the top post modded "funny" at the moment. The government is making an attempt at forcing speech, with their police power, on the speakers. Just like Tipper Gore with the PMRC, Hitler with the yellow Stars of David, pink triangles and the rest.

That, Sir, is the issue.

Re:Wait, aren't they on "our side"?

[evilempireinc]

First of all, this isn't the same thing as the Parents Music Resource Center. Stickers such as "Explicit Lyrics" are inherently a moral judgement and carry with it the problems of some regulartory group deciding just what exactly is explicit. 'This disc protected by DRM Technology', is not a value judgement. It means that the company has paid money to another company which actively markets DRM technologies (such as Midbar) to use their product. This is much closer to an ingredient label. Are you going to argue that manufacturers being required to disclose that their product contains sugar, dimethol-hy-whatnot, is a violation of their free speech? As for the second half of your analogy, I'm not even sure where to begin. Labeling people for their religous and sexual preferences and then beginning a government campaign to exterminate the entire group does not even begin to compare to product labeling.

Re:Wait, aren't they on "our side"?

[Anonymous Coward]

Since when are consumer protection laws forced speech? Are you against the warning labels on cigarettes also? How about the anal leakage warning on Olean products? Perhaps they should do away with the FDA altogether and let people just take their chance?

I don't know if you are a troll or just an idiot.

Re:Wait, aren't they on "our side"?

[Erik Hollensbe]

So, you're saying that forcing companies to inform the customers that the stuff that they purchase may not work in thier current, 100% compliant system?

What about raising awareness of Digital Rights Management? I don't think that many people are that informed, yet. I had someone the other day insist that all I did with my mp3 stereo (in my car), was listen to pirated music, even though I tried to correct her several times.

This is a great way to do it.

That said, I live in oregon and while not a democrat (or member of any party), I think Wyden has done quite a lot in the department of protecting consumers rights to various digital possessions.

Re:Wait, aren't they on "our side"?

[Guppy06]

"Why are we bitching at the Democrats? Oh, because it was on slashdot and the genius editor posted it "from the compromising-freedom dept","

Um... it is a compromise. The legislation says "thou shalt label thy copy protection schemes," not "thou shalt not use copy protection schemes that deprive consumers of their fair use rights."

Re:Wait, aren't they on "our side"?

[GMontag]

Are you going to argue that manufacturers being required to disclose that their product contains sugar, dimethol-hy-whatnot, is a violation of their free speech?

Apparently you eat your media, otherwise you would not mistake this with a health issue. Folks like you are why ladders have so many nonsensical labels.

As for the second half of your analogy, I'm not even sure where to begin. Labeling people for their religous and sexual preferences and then beginning a government campaign to exterminate the entire group does not even begin to compare to product labeling.

Now what the hell are you talking about? I was obviously speaking as to labeling being bad, you, apparently, have the same problems as those that wish to label everything at the point of a gun.

Re:Wait, aren't they on "our side"?

[ObviousGuy]

Not a whit of difference. With all major manufacturers of electronic equipment promising to introduce DRM into their devices, the consumer isn't left with any choice in the matter. Perhaps Philips, the only anti-DRM holdout, will make a huge comeback in the home-entertainment area, but their wares are mostly crap.

It's sad, but this kind of feel-good legislation does nothing to attack the actual problem which is that circumventing DRM is illegal according to the DMCA. Like other liberal proposals (midnight basketball) it is full of good intentions without the benefit of thoughtfulness.

Re:Wait, aren't they on "our side"?

[GMontag]

I am not in favor of the government forcing ladder manufacturers to "inform" their customers that they should not stand on their toes at the top while it is on ice either. Not even touching the Oragon thing.

Re:Wait, aren't they on "our side"?

[RazzleFrog]

Why are you so against consumer labeling? On obvious things (like your ladder example) it is silly but on something like this most consumers have no clue. I would say that I am the only person in my office who even knows that copy protection exists.

When you buy a product there is an "implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose." In the case of a cd it is that you can listen to the music anywhere on any type of cd player. If a CD will not play in my computer then it is violating that warranty. In order to avoid this the vendor must clearly label that it may not work in all devices and if it does not work in my device I may request a full refund.

Re:Wait, aren't they on "our side"?

[Guppy06]

"Since when are consumer protection laws forced speech? Are you against the warning labels on cigarettes also? How about the anal leakage warning on Olean products?"

There's a fine line between "warning" and "declaration." The products you mentioned that had genuine warning labels had real detrimental side effects.

On the other hand, labels on food that say "genetically modified" or "irradiated" are not warnings because there are no real detrimental side-effects to using these foods (or at least no claims of side-effects that can hold water). Forcing these groups to put declarations on their products only serves one purpose: to breed unfounded prejudice against those labeled products.

Now, I don't feel that folks who sell genetically modified and/or irradiated food should be able to hide what they do to their food, because there are people who want to make a political choice (or, in the case of irradiated food, they're just stupid*). However, public disclosure is a far way away from putting a neon label that's essentially designed to bias those that would not otherwise care.

*You know you're just going to take it home and microwave it anyway!

Re:Wait, aren't they on "our side"?

[evilempireinc]

Apparently you eat your media, otherwise you would not mistake this with a health issue

What I was attempting to do was to draw a distinction between labels based on subjective judgements such as Explicit Lyrics Labels, where some group is required to make a judgement call, and those that are instead used for disclosure of information. A label saying that this CD contains DRM Technology would serve the same function that the nutrution label serves on food for example, letting consumers avoid products that contain things they might find undesirable.

Now what the hell are you talking about? I was obviously speaking as to labeling being bad, you, apparently, have the same problems as those that wish to label everything at the point of a gun.

What I'm saying is that I don't think drawing a parallel between a warning label on CDs and Hitler's persecution of Jews and homosexuals makes much sense.

Re:Wait, aren't they on "our side"?

[identity0]

DRM technologies act almost like consoles or OSes - they're a platform for other content, and they have a set of devices that are compatible, and a set of devices that are incompatible with them.

A lot of old CD players have problems with DRM-equipped CDs because DRM uses new technology that isn't installed on old players, or intentionally introduces flaws to the recording to screw up old players. If you unknowingly buy a DRM-equipped CD, it's like if you bought a new game at the store, only to find later that it was a Mac-only or Windows-only game that wouldn't play on your computer.

If you go get a computer game these days, you'll see a requirements label on the box that specifies what kind of computer you'll need, and a content advisory label that tell you how violent it is, etc. GMontag seems to be confusing the purpose of the two. I know I sure as hell would not like to pay $20 for a CD and find out it won't play on my home system...

- Hokuto

Re:Wait, aren't they on "our side"?

[Anonymous Coward]

The government at most should label products with health and safety issues. To stick labels on every moral battle will end with all of us tatooed billboards of stupid nitpicking between the two major political parties. Let's try to keep labels about safety and not morals, no matter which side of the issue you favor.

Re:Wait, aren't they on "our side"?

[Steve B]

The government is making an attempt at forcing speech, with their police power, on the speakers.

Yep, and properly so. A lie of omission, when it would mislead a reasonable person into making a false assumption, is just that -- a lie. A lie uttered in connection with a commercial transaction is fraud. Fraud is a crime, and is recognized as such by pretty much everybody who accepts that there is any such thing as "crime". QED.

Re:Wait, aren't they on "our side"?

[Steve B]

The government at most should label products with health and safety issues.

So, you don't think I would be doing anything wrong if I sold ordinary tap water as "Dr. Steve's Muscle-Making, Brain-Building, Potency-Pumping Elixir"? After all, the tap water isn't unhealthy or unsafe (not even by diverting people from trying other more promising techniques toward those ends -- that merely results in them staying the same, not becoming any worse off).

As pointed out upthread, products ordinarily come with a "warranty of implied fitness" (i.e. the expectation that if used for their intended purpose by a reasonable and prudent person, they'll work as expected). A 5 1/2" silver disk with copy prevention that looks like a CD and is not clearly labeled as a non-CD is fraudulent, for the same reason that counterfeit machine parts are fraudulent -- they just don't do what a reasonable purchaser would expect of them.

Re:Wait, aren't they on "our side"?

[Steve B]

There's a fine line between "warning" and "declaration." The products you mentioned that had genuine warning labels had real detrimental side effects. On the other hand, labels on food that say "genetically modified" or "irradiated" are not warnings because there are no real detrimental side-effects to using these foods (or at least no claims of side-effects that can hold water).

The labelling under discussion here falls into the former category -- it is a matter of clear and obvious fact that it will be difficult or impossible to play round silver objects bearing copy-restricted content on some CD players, to transfer the sounds encoded on the disk to a portable MP3 player, or otherwise use it in some of the ways that one would expect a CD to be usable.

Re:Wait, aren't they on "our side"?

[ObviousGuy]

So, you don't think I would be doing anything wrong if I sold ordinary tap water as "Dr. Steve's Muscle-Making, Brain-Building, Potency-Pumping Elixir"? After all, the tap water isn't unhealthy or unsafe (not even by diverting people from trying other more promising techniques toward those ends -- that merely results in them staying the same, not becoming any worse off).

Never shopped at GNC, have you?

A 5 1/2" silver disk with copy prevention that looks like a CD and is not clearly labeled as a non-CD is fraudulent

This is a dead argument. These copy protected CDs follow the CD spec very closely and are in violation of none of its requirements. They are playable in any CD player that also conforms to the spec. Unfortunately, older CD player manufacturers cut many corners because they never expected certain features would be used. Your complaint here is not with the CDs but with the players.

Re:Wait, aren't they on "our side"?

[trezor]

The point still remians regardsless of the sloppyness of the manufacturers.

The point is that when you buy an audio-cd, you expect it to be playable in all cd-players. If your player plays red-book cds, but not crippled discs, its not the player thats the problem. Its the crippled disc.

They made it non-conformant to red-book standards, and that is causing problems. That makes it their responsibility.

And that was the point I guess you missed. As simple as that: Their tampering makes it a crippled product. And they know it.

Re:Wait, aren't they on "our side"?

[GMontag]

Nope, I am not "confused" about anything, I just do not agree with you. Perhaps you find this amazing, but it is true.

I don't buy $20 parts for my Jeep unless they are supposed to work on the thing and I only buy from merchants that will take the parts back if they do not work as expected.

Looks like some real market forces embeded in the valid example above. None include the government mandated labeling of anything.

Re:Wait, aren't they on "our side"?

[Trekologer]

The problem is that the "label" will eschew the truth of the DRM system. VHS tapes and DVD discs have "Macrovision Quality Protection" logos on them now, suggesting that without Macrovision, the picture or sound quality would be substandard (which is actually the opposite).

Re:Wait, aren't they on "our side"?

[identity0]

I don't know any store that will take back an open CD case, because they're afraid of the same thing as the record labels - piracy. Really, they need to inform their customers of DRM tech just like they inform them of return policies.

For

[gearheadsmp]

the more bandwidth hungry of you, here's the link of the Senator's site w/ pictures.

Kind of like Magic Gate tech from Sony

[ObviousGuy]

Even though Sony explains clearly in little print on the back of the Memory Stick packaging that Magic Gate is a DRM technology, it doesn't stop people from thinking that it's something new and cool. They look at the label and figure it must be better than normal non-Magic Gate Memory Sticks.

Labels like these are not the solution and only restrict manufacturer's rights and put a crimp on their profits for no reason whatsoever. Of course, Wyden is from Oregon and may have a small stake in the paper manufacturing increase that will necessarily occur if such a bill is passed.

Re:Kind of like Magic Gate tech from Sony

[Gulik]

Labels like these are not the solution and only restrict manufacturer's rights and put a crimp on their profits for no reason whatsoever.

The labels may not be the answer (as you said, a lot of people probably won't read them), but I don't see how this is a restriction on the manufacturer's rights, except insofar as you think they have a right to sell a broken CD as if it were a real CD. If they insist on doing so, they should have their profits crimped.

Re:Kind of like Magic Gate tech from Sony

[deblau]

Labels like these are not the solution and only restrict manufacturer's rights and put a crimp on their profits for no reason whatsoever.

Rhetorical comment, comment requiring further explanation, and comment unsupported by evidence, in that order. Please don't feed the trolls.

Re:Kind of like Magic Gate tech from Sony

[QuantumRiff]

>Of course, Wyden is from Oregon and may have a small stake in the paper manufacturing increase that will necessarily occur if such a bill is passed.

Yes, because certainly big companies like Intel don't have 15,000 employees in the state of Oregon! They can't possibly do most research and development of new processors at the Jones Farm campus in Portland. There is no way that a huge number of Silocon wafers are made in the Willamette Valley ( Portland, Salem, Eugene, all cities in between) becuase of the very clean and pure water that we have. Certainly not all the telecommunications equipment located in this state. (Many undersea fibers come to the Oregon coast because of the gentel slope of the contenintal shelf here)

Nope, were all either loggers, killing the forrest, or we're the crazy, dreadlock wearing white people sabotoging the world in the name of the forrests and animals. Wake up, Oregon isn't the sleepy bunch of rednecks and millworkers every one seems to think.

A happy medium

[NetDrain]

Let's hope that the Hollings bill doesn't also pass, because then you might as well slap the same generic label on every single digital device out there, just like danger tags on everything -- "Misuse of this kleenex could cause personal injury." You know what I mean.

But, simply by putting a label on the product that says "Restricts blah blah" people who wouldn't have had a clue will now at least have heard of copyright protection and digital restrictions. The more it's talked about, the more people will be judicious with their purchases, and hopefully we can see a happy medium balance itself out.

Sure, Mom and Pop won't know what the hell that tag means, but when us college students figure realize "hey, I can't download my music anymore?! WTF!!" sales of young-person-targeted devices (PDAs, MP3 players, sleek laptops, etc.) will drop if the restrictions are too high.

Now, if only we can get this through, fix the DMCA, and repeal the PATRIOT act...

Re:A happy medium

[Beatbyte]

Sales will drop of restricted hardware. Taiwan will surely have a device that plays any and everything. Otherwise they'll have a DIY web page on how to mod a playstation 3 into a blah blah blah that plays anything.

The hard part is finding musicians that don't support the DRM crap so you can support them. Feed a musician, take money away from the RIAA.

Doh!

[gearheadsmp]

should have RTFA more closely. How redundant of me.

Re:F***ing Democrats

[adzoox]

No, just the opposite: a liberal wants equal rights. The only way to have equality is to strip EVERYONE of their freedoms and be under government control and government dependency - that way we are MADE/FORCED equal.

Don't underestimate the "masses".

[Ungrounded Lightning]

But you know that the majority of buyers are people who don't understand what the consequences are.

And part of that is because nobody TOLD them there are consequences.

But as soon as warning labels start showing up, some of 'em will start to wonder what they're being warned about

So some will ask, or look around on the net, and maybe find out. Then they'll be able to make an informed decision about whether it matters to them enough to affect their purchase decision.

And others will just avoid products with the warning label in favor of those without - which will create pressure on the providers to stop using technologies which require a warning label. B-)

Don't underestimate joe sixpack. Just because he isn't an expert on the things YOU'RE expert on doesn't mean he's dumb or lazy. He may be quite the genius, and just focussed on other interests.

Re:Don't underestimate the "masses".

[dmeranda]

But as soon as warning labels start showing up, some of 'em will start to wonder what they're being warned about

Especially when the warning reads: Secured for your protection.

The industry always likes to reverse the meaning of all important words to make something bad sound good. Remember SDMI or "Secure" media. All warnings that the product is so secure that you can't even use it!

Re:Don't underestimate the "masses".

[Anonymous Coward]

"Quality protected by Macrovision"

Four words that mean "instant boycott"

Re:Don't underestimate the "masses".

[Anonymous Coward]

Labels are going to prevent people from buying crippled products just as much as they stop people from smoking.

Re:Don't underestimate the "masses".

[buddydawgofdavis]

True, don't underestimate the masses, but don't count on them to support an anti-DRM position either. People are funny that way. Here are two possible scenerios:

1. DRM is promoted as a means to improve quality / reduce the sky-rocketing prices. Many consumers might be under the impression that they are footing the bill for piracy both in cost as well as selection. The "masses" may actually favor DRM tech.

2. The possibility that ALL CD's are labelled as "...may include DRM technology".-- In this instance, no real information is aquired by the consumer. I find it unlikely that the content provider would be required to disclose the exact nature of the DRM technology employed. I am sure Hollywood would be more than agreeable to a "generic" anti-pirating sticker especially if all CDs and DVDs had one.

Contrary to the intent of this bill, I suspect we will end up with scenerio #2...

...in a <chortle>democracy</chortle> this is known as compromise.

Re:Don't underestimate the "masses".

[trezor]

• So some will ask, or look around on the net, and maybe find out. Then they'll be able to make an informed decision about whether it matters to them enough to affect their purchase decision.

Yeah. I think I see it happen as we speak.

• Consumer: DRM? What is DRM?
• Salesman: DRM is the new technology.

This is where we have to options for further communication. Lets take the simplest (shortest) first.

• Consumer: Ok. That's cool. I'll take it.

Now the second.

• Consumer: New technology doing what?
• Salesman: I dunno. You could search on the internet and make an informed decision. But this DRM thing works GREAT!
• Consumer: Ok. That's cool. I'll take it.

Not to be cynical, but I kinda don't see that happening. People aren't stupid, no, but they just don't care. We are the tech-guys (and gals) and that might be hard for us to grasp, but really people, the truth is that most people couldn't care less.

Until, offcourse, the day they find out they have been screwed. But not before. Because people don't care about tech stuff, and technology is tech stuff, not civil liberties. It might have an impact but people wouldn't know, and they won't.

Re:Don't underestimate the "masses".

[zero_offset]

But as soon as warning labels start showing up, some of 'em will start to wonder what they're being warned about

Especially when the warning reads: Secured for your protection.

Or when a giant yellow and red sticker on the front proudly proclaims:

NEW! ADVANCED MAGIC-GATE MEDIA PROTECTION!

...leading the average buyer to assume this is some fantastic thing they can't live without. When the buyer doesn't know anything about what they're buying, it's SIMPLE to use the ancient secrets of the marketing vampires to put a "you must have this" spin on it. In a similar vein, I've actually met people who were excited about the "chance" to register their software. They think it's cool. Makes 'em feel important. They never stop to consider that it's no different than the guy at Radio Shack asking for their home address (I know, they stopped that).

I have a feeling we haven't seen the worst of this DRM problem yet.

Re:Don't underestimate the "masses".

[japhmi]

Then part of the bill will have to be what the words say etc. i.e. it must be so big and say a specific thing, or one of a few choices. (Like the surgen general's warning on cigarettes).

Re:Don't underestimate the "masses".

[natet]

But as soon as warning labels start showing up, some of 'em will start to wonder what they're being warned about

The problem here is that will the labels look like warnings, or will they say something like "This cd protected by xxxxxx DRM!" and make it sound like a good thing? If the bill states that the labels must clearly indicate that the product is deficient in some area, and must be able to be read without the aid of a micro-dot reader, then, yah this is a good idea.

Don't you mean..

[antis0c]

Anti-Fair Use?

Re:Don't you mean..

[green1]

this is what I percieve to be the big problem... I can see a law requiring such things to be labelled, and then the companies complying by slapping stickers on them that say "This disc features new DRM technology for your protection.", then your average consumer who has no idea what "DRM" stands for, and even less of a clue that "Digital Rights Managment" is actually translated to "crippled" will simply read it and think WOW! this one has an extra FEATURE called DRM.... I don't know what it is... but if it's for my protection than it must be a GOOD thing!

it's one thing to require labeling, it's another thing to convince the people who apply the labeling to want to make their product look bad... whatever else we might think about the RIAA/MPAA/ETC, if there is one thing they are good at it is MARKETTING... and this is one thing I REALLY don't want to see them put their "spin" on.

Trojan horse?

[ObviousGuy]

If something is clearly labeled as having DRM, and we can expect that most if not all major device manufacturers will be putting some sort of DRM in their machines, then any circumvention of that DRM limitation is a flagrant violation of the DMCA.

To quote Ackbar, "It's a trap!"

Re:Fucking Democrats

[Anonymous Coward]

Fucking dumbass slashdot wankers, can't be bothered to actually read and comprehend the summary, much less the article before launching off and attacking someone.

Geez dude, you give all other users > 500,000 a bad name, yaknow?

*Stupidfuck*

Consumer notification is a good thing.

[JBhoy]

A review of Sen. Wyden's site does not reveal any draft of the bill in question. However, based on comments in the article, it sounds like a good idea.

This is the same Sen. Wyden who has sponsored a Senate resolution on consumer's rights to use digital content. A link to the PDF here.

The advantage of mandatory labelling for consumer devices that have anti-copy technology installed is that the consumer can know, at a glance, whether the device in question will allow him or her to make fair use of digital content he or she has purchased.

Obviously, the Hollywood crowd would prefer such a bill never see the light of day, since it would make devices with anti-copying technology potentially very unpopular. I can imagine that Sony wouldn't be thrilled.

At the same time, I can foresee that this is the kind of domestic issue that could easily get buried under the current foreign policy and economic crises.

Re:Consumer notification is a good thing.

[bofkentucky]

Just a prediction, Sen. Wyden's reelection fund isn't going to be as deep without the funding from Entertaiment lobby, 84% of their donations in the last election went to Dems, but if they don't play nice, I doubt that will continue. Thank Open Secrets for the info.

Re:Consumer notification is a good thing.

[Steve B]

84% of [entertaiment lobby] donations in the last election went to Dems

You'd think that even if Republicans don't have any principles, they'd at least have enough self-preservation instinct to make life unpleasant for their enemies. Even lower animals can figure that out.

Ahh, the rainy state...

[Anonymous Coward]

Makes me proud to be an Oregonian. It's about time we the consumer started getting some support from congress. At the very least, it'll increase awareness of the situation at hand further than your average geek and poor college student.

One more vote Mr. Wyden will be getting come next election.

Re:F***ing Democrats

[aftk2]

Yeah, that really makes sense. The damn libs want to strip us of our freedoms!@#! Of course, it's Ron Wyden who is sponsoring a bill that will force the government to explain Total Information Awareness, as well as where money appropriated to it goes.

Re:Fucking Democrats

[aardvarkjoe]

Hey, Fishstick, ever consider a job a /. editor? You'd fit right in. ;)

Re:F***ing Democrats

[Azureflare]

LoL I don't know where you get that idea, but that's called FASCISM, and that's not what democrats are about. The democrats are weak now, and I think they're a bunch of knock-kneed weasels, but at least they still believe in all of the constitution, unlike some other political party I could mention...I think the constitution is going out of style. Probably another constitution will be written soon, with the words "BIBLE" on it.

At least we can play with our toys until doomsday =P

ANOTHER WARNING

[cygnus]

SURGEON GENERAL'S WARNING: Smoking Cigarettes Can Be Hazardous To Your Health.

lot of good that one does. what if this one isn't different?

Re:ANOTHER WARNING

[Arjuna Theban]

One product is addictive, the other isn't.

Yes, they are different.

Re:ANOTHER WARNING

[hhknighter]

I think that's just common sense. Most, if not all, people that smoke willingly do so because they know it's bad for their health (legally smoking, not those Junior high/high school kiddies in some cave near their school). However, not all people are fully aware of computer technology. The general public are not or unwilling to be at a sophisticated level where they understand the real technology within. Good example would be consumers buying CDRs just to make copies, not knowing media, CD protection, speed and other goodies are involved.

With that said, unless a product is so convincing that the general public will do anything to obtain it (or forcibly so, *cough* windows), people have a choice not to buy it, rather than paying for a dud. IMHO, most consumers do not want to by a music CD only workable on a DRM enabled machine. And they seriously don't want to buy a dud and then find out they have to get another expensive device to use it.

The difference is, consumers are given the choice to make their own decision. Good or bad ones, are up to the consumer

Re:ANOTHER WARNING

[TheLoneDanger]

The idea of dying slowly from lung cancer in a couple of decades is a difficult thing to imagine. It's pretty hard to imagine yourself weak and frail and dying. Copying restrictions have a much more immediate effect. They run counter to our learned desire for 'convenience'.
'Hmm this cigarette is probably taking another hour off of my life. Oh well.' as opposed to 'Why the fsck won't this cd play on my pc? I've wasted a fscking hour trying to rip an mp3 from this damn thing.'

It's a nuisance, and people react much more to the small things they can immediately feel the effect of than the larger things they need to think about.

Re:ANOTHER WARNING

[Anonymous Coward]

how do you know what that label has done??? do you have access to a parallel universe that doesn't have the label?

Re:ANOTHER WARNING

[Mitreya]

lot of good that one does. what if this one isn't different?

I would guess more people might smoke if not for the warning. This bill is not meant as a solution to the problem. But it certainly is a minimal first step. You don't think these smoking warnings should be abolished, do you?

Re:ANOTHER WARNING

[Nakanai_de]

Actually, most cigarettes (or, at least the print ads) bear the warning "Smoking during pregnancy greatly increases the risk of birth defects." It's a loophole in the system, where the tobacco companies get to imply that if you're male or not pregnant, smoking is ok, while still obeying the letter of the law.

Re:ANOTHER WARNING

[Anonymous Coward]

I dunno, I think I'm addicted to mp3's.

Re:ANOTHER WARNING

[Anonymous Coward]

My brother agonzied for a year trying to quit smoking. Really hard and painful. It was a struggle.

Then terrorists murder him 6 months after he quits.

If only he was out on a cigarrette break he could be alive today.

Why isn't this guy running for president?

[zutronics]

During my unemployment tour "02-03", I've watched Wyden fight for some good causes on CSPAN. He is the guy who pushed for more oversight in the Office of Total Information Awareness program. He also has exposed the anti-consumer tactics of the oil industry. Why aren't there more like him around?

text only site

[Anonymous Coward]

that's amazing & good .. but the layout could use some serious improvement so it looks decent on lynx /.. actually it doesnt look that greeat on any browser.

Im all for this as long as the label says

[Anonymous Coward]

Parental Guidance
Explicit Copyprotection

Gotta love this quote

[sixdotoh]

"Never in our history have fewer been in a position to control more of the creative potential of our society than now"

Or is that really the issue? Is it really restricting creative potential? Name one artist who won't release, for example, a CD because they think they won't make money because of file sharing. Not that I'm for illegal downloading, but honestly.

Wouldn't you agree that most mainstream "artist" are more profit driven than driven by creativity?

Re:Gotta love this quote

[Anonymous Coward]

The point about who controls the creative potential of society is much more sophisticated than this - the argument is outlined very well in Lessig's "The Future of Ideas".

First, art does not exist in a vacuum. Rather, it draws on previous experience and the public domain. Renaissance artists admiried Greek art; Disney borrows fairy tales. Countless classical composers wrote fantasies on folk songs. The erosion of the public domain harms all artists by eliminating the ability to borrow from the past.

Second, the zealous defense of copyright has the ability to unreasonably restrict what an artist may use in the course of their work. Say, for example, that you want to make a short film of a play you wrote. Hope you made the costumes yourself; the storebought dress your lead actress is wearing is probably a copyrighted design. Does she sit down in a chair in one scene? Better clear it with the furniture designer before you distribute your film.

Noone's saying, of course, that you can't make a home movie to send to grandma. But what about, say, a group of high school students who just want to put their rendition of a Shakespeare play on the web? Or a computer-programmer-by-day who's itching to share a monologue he wrote? The promise of the Internet (and cheap electronics) was that now _anyone_ could try their hand at being creative, and possibly be heard.

The main harm of this concentration of copyright is not to a "mainstream" artist with the backing of a studio and corporate lawyer. It is, rather, to the individual who wants to go out and make something new - just because. And that's just sad.

Anyway, that's my understanding of (that part of) Lessig's book. It's good, go read it. (though I'm not sure I agree with his proposal for radio spectrum...)

File under UNLIKELY

[Nathan Ramella]

If the govt can't even get labels on food that's been irradiated or genetically engineered (important things that effect everybody and that a lot of people are concerned about), I have little faith in them putting labels on something like entertainment media that outside of the computing pseudo-intelligentsia and chinese midnight street market circles, nobody cares about.

the urgent need to abolish DRM and copy protection . (Don't get me wrong, I would prefer lack of copyright and copyprotection, I'm trying out for Fox News with all this wild speculation)

Re:File under UNLIKELY

[/dev/trash]

My store sells irradiated meat. How do I know? It's labelled as such.

psh

[Exiler]

Strategicly placed bear mugs can be used as clothing, if they're opaque or maybe dark translucent.

new massive attack album?

[gimpboy]

wow that's cool. i wasn't aware they were coming out with a new album. it's a shame it's copy protected, i wont be able to use it since i dont own a normal cd player.

Re:new massive attack album?

[packeteer]

Damnit i didn't know their new album was copy-pretected too. Just the other day i ripped my Mezzanine cd to mp3 so i can play it on my rio volt cd player and it was awsome... how am i suposed to use my mp3 player for cd's i pay for when they do this crap. This just means i might have to download the mp3 to a cd i own or perhaps get around the copy-protection *gasp* which is a big no-no in the eyes of the same company.

Re:new massive attack album?

[trezor]

Stopped me from buying the album as well. I dont buy shit like that. It's that simple.

God damn it. I never get this right.

[Nathan Ramella]

The FUNNIEST part of my message was,

'You'd think that the mouth-pieces for the anti-copyprotection front were storing their original DVDs and CDs in a rock sander for the urgency with which they call for the abolishment of copy-protection and DRM.'

AND I CUT IT OUT!..

I suck at the internet.

Re:God damn it. I never get this right.

[Anonymous Coward]

Acutually, that isn't all that funny

Re:God damn it. I never get this right.

[Anonymous Coward]

Hi, welcome to slashdot, yes, you're at slashdot, I can tell you came from fark :)

Okay this is going too far

[Anonymous Coward]

Wish there was a way of avoiding posts by this karma(?) whore without having to create an account and put him or her on my foes list.

Re:Okay this is going too far

[Anonymous Coward]

There isn't much you CAN do. I'm getting sick of this teenage girls constant demands for attention too. I wish she'd get a boyfriend already. Well, either that or kill herself.

Re:Okay this is going too far

[SexyTr0llGal]

Come on ACs! You're smart enough to know that this character isn't really female!

Re:Fucking Democrats

[Fishstick]

I assume you're slamming me for posting the same comment twice.

Yeah, after I posted this reply the parent got modded into oblivion.

I posted to the top thread to elicit some intelligent discussion.

I guess I failed (thank you very much) ;-p

Re:Fucking Democrats

[EnderWiggin99]

Hey, there's only so much time you can waste before you miss the opportunity for first-post status.

Don't call it anti-piracy!

[frovingslosh]

This technology should never be called anti-piracy technology; it's very strange to see Slashdot use such a deceptive term. This is anti-copy technology. It prevents fair use as well as piracy. It prevents users from doing things with the music they buy that the Supreme Court has already declaired as totally legal. There is no technology that just prevents piracy but allows legitimate use by users, just the opposite, many of these technologies hardly slow pirates at all, but present serious problems for legitimate users.

Re:Don't call it anti-piracy!

[GMontag]

It does NOT prevent Copyright violatiions, aka "Piracy" at all. It just makes gives the average consumer more hassles.

This is a mutant Tipper Gore PMRC measure at it's best.

Re:Don't call it anti-piracy!

[Anonymous Coward]

So let me get this straight. You are against the whole protection scheme thing but you don't think consumers should be warned about it? How does that make any sense. You could at least try to be consistent from one post to the next. I expect better from a 5 digit ID.

Re:Don't call it anti-piracy!

[Guppy06]

"This technology should never be called anti-piracy technology;"

Dammit, I want real anti-piracy technology! Where's my revenue cutter? I want my deck gun!

Re:Don't call it anti-piracy!

[dirk]

This technology should never be called anti-piracy technology; it's very strange to see Slashdot use such a deceptive term. This is anti-copy technology. It prevents fair use as well as piracy. It prevents users from doing things with the music they buy that the Supreme Court has already declaired as totally legal. There is no technology that just prevents piracy but allows legitimate use by users, just the opposite, many of these technologies hardly slow pirates at all, but present serious problems for legitimate users.

While it does stop some fair use (depending on the technology), I think calling it "anti-piracy technology" is completely appropriate. That is what it is designed for, and the major task it accomplishes. Saying it isn't descriptive enough is like saying the alarm system on a car shouldn't be called an "anti-theft device" because it also stops the rightful owner of breaking in when he loses his keys. Nit-picking at terminology isn't going to help the actual battle.

Re:Don't call it anti-piracy!

[Anonymous Coward]

well, they probably shouldn't call it "anti-copy" either, since it's pretty easy to copy anyway (cf. the Massive Attack CD: you can use the "strategically placed black marker" trick or the "skip the first second or two in iTunes" trick to get a copy).

just BS and rhetoric, that's all .. they can't get by calling it "copyright infringement" so they have to ratchet it up with "piracy".

I fully expect to see "piracy" connected to "terrorism" soon. Maybe in Iraq they copy a lot of CDs?

Re:Don't call it anti-piracy!

[frovingslosh]

While it does stop some fair use (depending on the technology), I think calling it "anti-piracy technology" is completely appropriate.

Names are very important. Few politicians are brave enough to not vote for a bill titled something like "Special schooling spending for Kids at risk", while they would not vote for the same bill if it was called "Tax increase to spend more money on disruptive delinquent students than the entire rest of the class combined". In this case, if the name anti-piracy is attached to the technology, it makes it sound like anyone who opposes it is in favor of theft of intellectual property. That hardly the case and most Slashdot readers know this technology stops more legitimate uses that it stops any real piracy. Slashdot should not call such technology by a name that encourages it's legal support and enforcement.

Re:Don't call it anti-piracy!

[bofkentucky]

I wonder what would happen if the customs service, coast guard, and US Navy were brought to bear on the SE Asian copy houses, I bet a bunch of SEALs blowing up a CD copy factory would be kick ass.

Re:Don't call it anti-piracy!

[Anonymous Coward]

well, the nazis called it war, not genocide. being specific with your terms in pasionate situations is very important.

Re:Don't call it anti-piracy!

[Steve B]

I think calling it "anti-piracy technology" is completely appropriate. That is what it is designed for

I don't concede this assertion. IMO, one of the design goals is to establish standards that enforce controls on usage, not just copying. Anyone who cares to prove me wrong is welcome to market a DVD player in the US that is infinitely region-resettable and ignores fast-forward lockouts.

Re:Don't call it anti-piracy!

[Phroggy]

While it does stop some fair use (depending on the technology), I think calling it "anti-piracy technology" is completely appropriate. That is what it is designed for, and the major task it accomplishes. Saying it isn't descriptive enough is like saying the alarm system on a car shouldn't be called an "anti-theft device" because it also stops the rightful owner of breaking in when he loses his keys. Nit-picking at terminology isn't going to help the actual battle.

However, the purpose of the proposed warning labels is to alert consumers of anti-copy technology that may prevent them from legally copying the music they buy. It is not to alert consumers of anti-piracy technology, since piracy (or rather, copyright infringement) is illegal anyway.

Re:Don't call it anti-piracy!

[Blue Stone]

"While it does stop some fair use (depending on the technology), I think calling it "anti-piracy technology" is completely appropriate. That is what it is designed for, and the major task it accomplishes. Saying it isn't descriptive enough is like saying the alarm system on a car shouldn't be called an "anti-theft device" because it also stops the rightful owner of breaking in when he loses his keys. Nit-picking at terminology isn't going to help the actual battle."

You're right of course.
Then again, I have to say I'm pretty unhappy with that nutcracker I bought that was shaped like a sledgehammer.... all it leaves is a little walnut-shaped stain. :(

Re:Don't call it anti-piracy!

[deblau]

This technology should never be called anti-piracy technology; it's very strange to see Slashdot use such a deceptive term. It prevents fair use as well as piracy.

So tell me again who's using deceptive terms, Mr. We-don't-need-no-stinking-Navy-to-prevent-piracy?

Re:Don't call it anti-piracy!

[bay43270]

I've heard reps from the EFF refer to the discs as 'crippled'. I like 'playback restriction technology' since many of the discs can't be played in old players, computer cd-roms, etc.

Re:Don't call it anti-piracy!

[kavau]

Very true! And on the same note, unauthorized distribution of copyrighted material should not be called piracy in the first place. This is an anti-euphemism of sorts. Pirates are people that use vehement violence to capture ships, loot their treasures, and kill the crew. Not some college kids that care more about music than about copyright laws. This label takes a rather trivial issue (a little less dough in the pockets of big recording companies) and blows it out of proportion (affront to civilized society by criminal, blood-thirsty hordes of mp3 pirates). To attach this 'piracy' label to file sharing was a very clever move by the recording industry.

Please, let's call it "Anti-Fair Use"

[dameron]

Using the language of the enemy means we've bought into their argument. Anyone with a positive bank account is against piracy, so let's please try to use language that best expresses our reasoned opinions.

-dameron

Re:Please, let's call it "Anti-Fair Use"

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow, http://slashdot.org/~frovingslosh got to this exact point just seconds before I made it. Go slashdot!

-dameron

Re:Please, let's call it "Anti-Fair Use"

[Anonymous Coward]

Funny how groupthink works, ain't it?

Re:Fucking Democrats

[Anonymous Coward]

You would think, but then that would be a little more extra work than you are willing to do. ;-)

Like any food product, it's truth in advertizing

[Obvious troll]

We want to know the ingredients of what we buy. If something has 5 grams of phenylalanine added, I want to know about it. This is exactly the same issue...

Worthless if UCITA ever gets passed

[kaltkalt]

This bill is all nice and fluffy, but it will be completely meaningless if UCITA ever passes. Let's get our congresspeople working on nipping UCITA in the bud before they start dreaming up other, less meaningful solutions to consumer-rights issues.

IEEE-USA has a position on copy control technology

[Anonymous Coward]

It is posted at http://www.ieeeusa.org/forum/POSITIONS/copycontrol systems.html

It providea a list of characteristics any proper copy control system should have, such as with respect to fair use, non-interference with normal operations, and other issues. It concludes that no technology that has been proposed to date can satisfy the characteristics.

Unfortunate, but understandeable

[kien]

I wanted to send Senator Wyden an email lending my support for his bill, so I encountered his contact page.

Under the Senate e-mail system, it is only possible for me to respond to messages from Oregonians. If you are traveling or on active duty, please fill out the form with an Oregon address and provide your current address within the message. If you are not from Oregon, I urge you to contact one of the Senators from your home state.

I sent my support along even though I don't live in Oregon, but I'm left wondering what this "Senate e-mail system" is and why it restricts him from replying to any out-of-state emails. It's perfectly understandable (and admirable) that he puts his constituents first, but is he forbidden to correspond with citizens that he doesn't directly represent?

--K.

Re:Unfortunate, but understandeable

[ObviousGuy]

It isn't email that you're sending him via that form, though.

As far as the system goes, it may just be a set of rules that prohibit him and other senators from responding to non-constituents. It cuts down on the time required to respond to messages if he only has to respond to Oregonians.

He gives you the solution, "contact one of the Senators from your home state."

Re:Unfortunate, but understandeable

[John Jorsett]

I sent my support along even though I don't live in Oregon, but I'm left wondering what this "Senate e-mail system" is and why it restricts him from replying to any out-of-state emails. It's perfectly understandable (and admirable) that he puts his constituents first, but is he forbidden to correspond with citizens that he doesn't directly represent?

The translation of his message is:

if you're aren't a constituent (and can prove it), I'm not going to care.

There's nothing inherent in the Senate email system that's going to keep him from responding if you're not from his state. He just doesn't want to hear from anyone who isn't in a position to vote for him.

Re:Unfortunate, but understandeable

[Anonymous Coward]

but I'm [L]eft ...

That's an understatement!

Re:Unfortunate, but understandeable

[HBergeron]

Actually no...

In order to prevent a Senator from using the Senate resources to develop a national e-mail list of supporters they are directed to only reply to e-mails from their own state. This prevents the use of a (unfortunately limited due to the sorry state of senate technology) resource meant for constituent contact for other purposes.

Don't assume what you do not know.

Re:Unfortunate, but understandeable

[kien]

In order to prevent a Senator from using the Senate resources to develop a national e-mail list of supporters they are directed to only reply to e-mails from their own state. This prevents the use of a (unfortunately limited due to the sorry state of senate technology) resource meant for constituent contact for other purposes.

Thanks, HB. Now, if you're up for a follow-up question, how "sorry" is the state of senate technology? Just curious.

--K.

Re:Unfortunate, but understandeable

[HBergeron]

gotta love this new notification system.

I'm sorry that I don't have a lot of time to respond right now, I'm leaving town in the morning but I will try to respond more fully sometime late next week. A few items:

1) Historical - The Senate did not have access to the internet at all until 1996. It was only accomplished then by a group of staffers who hacked the existing e-mail system to connect to the internet. Rather then allow this, the Sgt at Arms (Admin) finally establish regular web access.

2) That email - until three short months ago the Senate was using cc:mail for all communications. Not Notes, cc:mail. Despite the fact that it had been unsupported for years and regularly went down (and was unable to handle the volume of constituent e-mail.) The successor is a bastardized implementation of exchange. The actual exchange migration project was started 4 years before it was completed. In the first three months the Senate has suffered 5 days of downtime, and selective delivery of e-mails in high volume periods.

3) Only Compaq, and one configuration of compaq, are allowed to be purchased at any time. This is despite the fact that the SAA provides very little support for the in-office systems. A Senator-employed SysAdmin provides all of the local support. Dell is strictly prohibited. The price paid for the compaq systems is regularly at least 15% above the rate one would pay if you bought directly from the compaq website, for an identical system, software included.

4) The above mentioned sysadmins average a salary of approximately $40,000 per year. Most manage a 30+ system office with 3 servers, 4+ remote offices, and an entirely non-technical staff. The salary is a function of the fact that all Senate salaries are absurdly low for the work involved. While public service is a privilege, for the most part all mid-level (Sys Admins, Legislative Aides) and senior staff see a 2.5 to 3X increase in their compensation when moving to the private sector. The effects of this situation should be obvious.

5) A e-mails must be PRINTED and responded to on paper. The Senate has refused to invest in a sufficient authentication system to ensure that it would be very difficult to forge or redirect a Senator's e-mail communication (many law offices use systems for this.) Regardless, it is impossible to use the Senate's $35,000 per year per office correspondence system to respond directly to e-mails.

6) Senate offices are prohibited from using their technology budgets to a) pay a better sysadmin, or b) hire programers to improve the systems we do have.

For the record, I am not a Senate SA, but I have employed them. That's all I have off the top of my head.

Re:Unfortunate, but understandeable

[kien]

Ye gods, it's worse than I thought. I hope your response is modded to +5 Informative because people need to know this.

It is scary to contemplate government regulation of technology when the government is so behind the technological curve.

Thanks for the info!

--K.

Re:Unfortunate, but understandeable

[HBergeron]

On the road, doubt this will be modded up as it's a bit OT. It is important to understand that while the tech infrastructure is pathetic, that does not mean that the individual staff (the people using that infrastructure) are not tech savvy. A combination of administrative red tape CYA and woefully inadequate funding keeps it that way, regardless of what some of the more informed staffers may want.

Now, on the other hand, I am not saying that most Congressional staff are tech savvy - most are drawn from the same pool as staffs most law firms (for those who can't help themselves insert pol/lawyer joke here) and as many techies know law firms were basically the last part of the economy to computerize. In fact, if it were not for lexis/westlaw, they would probably still be using paper and secretaries. The kind of people who get involved with law GENERALLY (i just know someone will assume I'm making a blanket statement) are less interested in technology and less sensible to it's uses then people in other fields.

Also, while many of the legislative staff writing tech legislation would not know linux from dos or ... well I can't come up with anything good right now, does not immediately call into question the legislation they produce (that sound you hear is the mass of /.ers guffawing.) Some of these same talented people produce good legislation on health care despite not being MDs, on wall street despite not being financiers, and on aviation despite not being airline pilots. Sure plenty of bad legislation gets written, but that has more to do with actual malice aforethought then a lack of understanding of technology.

Re:Unfortunate, but understandeable

[kien]

Also, while many of the legislative staff writing tech legislation would not know linux from dos or ... well I can't come up with anything good right now, does not immediately call into question the legislation they produce (that sound you hear is the mass of /.ers guffawing.)

Lessig mentions Orrin Hatch in the final chapter of The Future of Ideas (too lazy to link it this time). However one feels about an old codger like Hatch, and whatever his motivations might be, he has been an important ally against two reviled /. enemies: Microsoft and the *AAs.

It's a bit comforting to know that there are some techno-savvy staffers, and I can imagine how difficult it must be for them to work within the constraints of "the system". Oh well, at least I can dream of an army of staffers armed with 3-foot long 2x4s (with "ClueX4" engraved upon them) invading the Offices of our reps. :)

--K.

It's not protected everywhere.

[Chuck Chunder]

It certainly is in Australia and I think Canada too. There's quite a bit of discussion about it on the Massive Attack forums. Quite a few unhappy people. Me included.

Re:It's not protected everywhere.

[GeckoX]

Bought mine last thursday here in canada, no sticker anywhere saying it was copy protected.
Wouldn't play in ANY of my players, except on my intel PC at work, using their stupid little player app which plays you pre-ripped versions. (Which do NOT sound any better than 128 bit mp3's, though I have absolutely NO idea what format/bitrate they are in)

Immediately returned it to HMV. No hassle there, but it just gets returned as a defect so unless this happens thousands of times there will likely be little effect seen.

Unfortunately it seems as if the masses are already buying into this crap hook, line and sinker with a very prevolent attitude of 'So what, you wanted to steal from the band? What's so wrong with copy-protection'. Don't get me fucking started...did I not just BUY the damned thing?

(as mentioned in the parent poster, you can see this lame assed attitude for yourself all over the massive attack forum, hardliners from both camps, but I get the distinct feeling that the pissed off fans of massive are the vocal minority and that the general attitude of the rest of the public is total ignorance and nonchalance (sp?).

Would Xerox agree on this?

[jonr]

Just a thought.

Get Real!

[gato_mato]

Like a label is going to change anything! I mean cigarettes have had "Surgeon General" labels on them for decades and IDIOTS still sue the tobacco industry because they "got cancer after the smoked for their lifetime". You put a label on the CD and in 10 years I'll sue the RIAA because I am addicted to Music & can't stop, "I am broke because I have to buy CDs, I can't help it they are addictive".

Gato

I dunno...

[TopShelf]

Since people making buying decisions based on the artist/content of the CD, I don't see where this will have any significant impact. It's not like you'll find protected & non-protected versions of the same CD out there...

Re:I dunno...

[hhknighter]

But it should make a difference if the CD I bought is not compatible with MP3 conversion or if the CD is NOT readable by common CD Players.

Software/Games already have copy protection all over them, disabling means to copy, also without any indications of protection. If that's on music CDs, shouldn't be a problem at all. But if I have to buy new DRM drives. That's a problem.

This shouldnt need to be a separate law...

[PyrotekNX]

If the DMCA is going to be validated anyway then it should be amended to it since they are so closely related.

Where am I? What planet is this?

[sweatyboatman]

[snip]Don't underestimate joe sixpack. Just because he isn't an expert on the things YOU'RE expert on doesn't mean he's dumb or lazy. He may be quite the genius, and just focussed on other interests.[/snip]

[spit take]

say what? am I still reading Slashdot? what kind of comment is this? not a flamer, not a troll... some sort of new entity never before seen.

I think I need to lie down.

sweatyb

More fun for me

[EverStoned]

I say bring it on. Anti-piracy measures just mean more things to me to crack, and I love cracking.

Fool me once

[BadDream]

Maybe the first time. But if the labels are consistent, maybe after someone gets burned once, they will avoid the media that has the warning. Fool me twice, shame on me. Shame there are so many fools in the world. ;-)

this topic keep coming up

[Anonymous Coward]

This topic(and related topics) keeps coming up. And I have to wonder...

Why is it OK for the music industry to take the lyrics from songs of which the copyright has expired, repackage that song into some CRAP(you've heard the songs..."Hey this is my favorite song...but, wait who the F*** is this!"), basically RIPPING a song into another FORMAT, then turn around and try to tell consumers, NO YOU CAN'T MAKE OGG OR MP3s out the songs that you BOUGHT even if it's for your own use. They sure haven't BOUGHT lyrics from songs where the copyright has expired!

hmmm...

Re:this topic keep coming up

[Anonymous Coward]

They pay licensing fees to the original copyright holders to do that. Redistribution of copyrighted material is only permitted by the expressed consent of the copyright holder. If something is in public domain then there is no issue at all.

This seems like a

[bob670]

great idea, I'm sure the RIAA will try to stop it. After all, isn't it more fun to villify and anger your customers than it is to educate them?

FINALLY

[Tuxinatorium]

Now they won't be able to screw you over by selling unreturnable products that are defective in the sense that the customer doesn't know ahead of time that he won't be able to play them on his computer, car stereo, or whatnot. I'm suprised someone hasn't already sued the pants off of the recording industry for that bullshit.

Re:FINALLY

[hhknighter]

I am sure that's because most of us do not have the funding to go for a law suit.

And how do you beat the argument - We did it to protect our products, your action is equivalent to a thiefing terrorist

Re:F***ing Democrats

[knobmaker]

The democrats are weak now, and I think they're a bunch of knock-kneed weasels, but at least they still believe in all of the constitution...

I wish that were true, but not a lot of Democrats support the 2nd Amendment. Many Democrats are as rabid on the War of Drugs as any Republican, and the WoD is probably the greatest threat to the Constitution in the last 100 years or so. It's completely destroyed the 4th Amendment, and it's making inroads on several other important elements of the Bill of Rights.

The sad fact is that neither the Republicans or the Democrats have any great respect for the Constitution. Both parties seem to view the Constitution as an inconvenient obstacle to whatever goofy social agenda their constituents like at the moment.

Truth-in-labelling is really a libertarian idea. In other words, buy copy-protected music if you like, but you should at least be allowed to know what you're buying. No force, no fraud, the holy duality.

(Disclaimer) I'm not a doctrinaire libertarian-- for example, I don't think we should sell the National Parks to Disney. But the major parties need to start being just a little more concerned with liberty, or pretty soon there won't be any left.

Re:Fucking Democrats

[frodo from middle ea]

thanks for spelling it out to me
Now a days the moment i see ANTI_PRIVACY (or PIRACY) , i am thining could i be the verizon customer, every body is fighting about :-)

SLASHDOT needs two distinct catagories:-
ANTI-PRIVACY
ANTI ANTI_PRIVACY

What is "Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet..." ???

[aphor]

It is garbage, originally derived from an ancient latin text, but now generated by clever programs to approximate the look and feel of english text for formatters and page rendering. The idea is that you can't actually read it, so your monkey-mind won't get sucked into the content when you are supposed to be meditating on the layout/rendering.

A more authoritative (seeming) answer for the bayesian filter people.

Re:Hi Everyone!!

[Anonymous Coward]

Hi, and welcome to Slashdot! If you're a faggot Linux user who hates Micro$oft Winblows, you'll fit right in around here!

1) I haven't had a girlfriend in a looong... well, okay. I've never had a girlfriend. Where can I get one?

You can't. But don't dispair, this doesn't mean that you are doomed to a life without sex. Just attend your local Linux Users Group meeting, as it is well known in the "geek" community that LUG meetings are really fronts for NAMBLA meetings.

If, for some reason, you're uncomfortable having sex with crusty old men or young boys, then you will have to wait until you are 21, then hang around the local Middle School and offer to buy the girls booze and cigarettes.

2) I've noticed a peculiar aroma emanating from my body at times, especially around the under arms area. Why is this?

This is good. This means that you are sophisticated and cultured like a Frenchman, rather than a simplistic hygiene-obsessed American cowboy.

3) One night I ran out of Mountain Dew and I collapsed on top of my keyboard. When I woke a few days later, ants were crawling all over me and eating the Doritos crumbs from my crotch. They are still there. What do I do?

The best way to rid yourself of ants is to burn them. Try soaking your crotch in lighter fluid, then setting it ablaze. Rubbing alcohol or gasoline will work as well.

4) My "Got Root?" shirt is turning yellow. It's a nice color, but where can I get nice, white one?

Go to cafepress.com and make your own! It'll be cheaper, and you'll be striking a blow against intellectual property! This time, though, try not to urinate on the shirt; that'll keep it fresh and white for weeks.

Re:Where am I? What planet is this?

[Ungrounded Lightning]

Don't underestimate joe sixpack. [...]

say what? am I still reading Slashdot? what kind of comment is this? not a flamer, not a troll... some sort of new entity never before seen.

Naw. Just a midwestern redneck with "Karma Excellent". B-)

If you're interested you can read some of my other posts

Not specific enough

[artemis67]

SURGEON GENERAL'S WARNING: Smoking Cigarettes Can Be Hazardous To Your Health.

lot of good that one does. what if this one isn't different?

What the warning really needs to say is:

SURGEON GENERAL'S WARNING: Smoking Cigarettes Causes Impotence

I'm sure a lot more guys would pay attention.

Re:Not specific enough

[ObviousGuy]

It doesn't, though.

At least not in a way that is immediately noticeable and traceable to the act of smoking.

Re:Not specific enough

[artemis67]

It doesn't, though.

At least not in a way that is immediately noticeable and traceable to the act of smoking.

It's one of the long-term effects of smoking. It causes the tiny veins in your body to become blocked or constricted; the penis has a lot of these, so the long-term effect of smoking may be that you can no longer get an erection.

Welcome...

[Anonymous Coward]

Welcome to news.com.com

"It's dot com.com"

The purpose of the law

[rillopy]

Putting anti-piracy labels on media would probably scare some people away from copying the stuff. And that, of course, is the whole purpose of law in the first place: stopping people from breaking it (pirating stuff in this case). The purpose isn't to catch as many people as possible.

If that were so, the keeping the laws a secret would do a grand job of filling the jails. So, by putting these labels on, it would do a good thing by preventing piracy without using force.

Rillopy

"Anti-piracy" a misnomer

[eekaterrorist]

They should be referred to as "anti-backup" or "anti-fair-use" labels.

Re:news.com.com

[Anonymous Coward]

CNet

I could start watching DVD

[Anonymous Coward]

I have refrained from getting anything related to DVD technology up to this point simply because of CSS and the DMCA. If DVD manufacturers where required to label their broken DVDs then I would consider looking into it ... DVD is a great technology, but it is brought down by some pretty haneous shit.

NR

Re:I could start watching DVD

[Anonymous Coward]

umm... u mean heinous

Re:I could start watching DVD

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm afraid he may have meant haneous. He also used "where" on purpose. His language twisting abilities is unparalleled.

Lessing is wrong and will be used.

[twitter]

Quoth the aritcle:

"Never in our history have fewer been in a position to control more of the creative potential of our society than now," Lessig said. "We have to buy them off, so they don't break the Internet in the interim."

Because the first statement is true, the plan will fail. Every major record label, and there are only five in the world, is putting in Digital Rights Denial. If you want to sell a non-major record in your store, the majors cut you off. So, what choice do you have? You look left, DRM, you look right, DRM. Now that internet radio has been shut down, Napster is dead, and the FBI will soon visit you for running P2P, you won't hear of anything but crappy major music. Not even the mighty Google can lead you to reasonable music can it? No, these lables will only dull you to the rights you have lost, make your kids think that it's right and waste time and money in general. The lables are going to be used for propaganda purposes. I can just imagine one now, "Copy Controled to feed our starving artist's hungry babies - Sharing is Stealing!". Every artists out there is going to love it when their five cent cut per sold CD is reduced to two cents to cover the cost of applying the lables.

You can't buy these bastards off, you can only avoid them. Buy used recodings, support local acts and turn the radio off. Oh yeah, that's what people have already started doing.

The internet has been broken already too. That's why "so few" people have so much control and I can't serve out of my house over the public network that being used by the local cable company. After all, if everyone could sever, word of mouth and Google would work for everyone including the artists who mostly would earn more money than they do now.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Sampling?

[pompomtom]

My sampler's got an analog input. I can't see this being a problem.

Apple's Answer

[tupps]

Another sticker on the iPod box: "This box has a sticker on it warning you not to steal music"

because he doesnt have the money

[Indy1]

to buy votes and influence the way the rest of the vote buying scum *cough*bush*cough* do.

Re:because he doesnt have the money

[bofkentucky]

Evidence please, Fritz and company are bought and sold by disney, Daschle is a pawn to the labor unions, and Edwards is a scum-sucking trial lawyer, where did Bush buy votes?

work around

[Anonymous Coward]

on osX hints today I saw that if you start your ripping after 10 seconds give or take into the first track on this Massive Attack you can rip the cd...check it out

Re:F***ing Democrats

[shadowbearer]

Not to mention destroying the 10th amendment....but that was long ago.

SB

MPAA, RIAA, Microsoft.

[rice_burners_suck]

I have a better idea. The government should REQUIRE any media that contains DRM, copy protection, or any sort of similar access management system, to contain everything necessary, plus full instructions, to completely bypass the copy protection. Furthermore, the government should REQUIRE companies that produce such "protected" products to pay a $30.00 processing fee, within 1 hour, to every individual who claims verbally that they have bypassed the protection, for each such claim, not to exceed $1,000,000.00 per individual per day. Oh, and if someone makes such a claim and the evil company doesn't know about it (such as, someone tells their friend that they have bypassed this crap, but never tells the company), the company must pay an additional "Convenience Fee" of $20.00 upon being notified of such violation, not to exceed $2,000,000.00 per individual per day. Oh, and the government should require that no audio recording can be sold to the consumer for an amount exceeding 99 cents, of which 98 cents goes directly to the artist's bank account and the remaining 1 cent goes to a fund for legal action against the RIAA, MPAA and Microsoft. And each of the above three mentioned entities shall pay $1,000,000.00 per day, plus interest, penalties, fines, and "Convenience Fees," into this fund, if the proceeds of the aforementioned 1 cent per album do not meet a minimum requirement of $5,000,000,000.00 (five billion dollars) on that day. Thereupon, the owners, managers and every employee of the aforementioned three evil entities shall be banished to Papua New Guinea, where they shall serve as slaves in caves to the brave natives. And did I mention that each of these entities shall pay in taxes, daily, two hundred percent of their bank account balance? Yeah, add that to the list.

I don't buy music. I turn on the radio. So there.

Re:Labeling (example for parent post):

[$$$$$exyGal]

For Tipper Gore:

My Journal is not appropriate for minors.

For those that are going to use my journal:

You need a web browser to view my journal.

--gal

But they are so tiny

[Chuck Chunder]

The size alone of the NW-MS11 was enough to sway me. I was willing to trade some of the minor inconveniences you mention for that level of portability.

Just one more step...

[tobes]

towards a world of independent consultant musicians, and businesses that cater to them. I wonder how many A&R guys have already made the jump?

Maybe now

[Chuck Chunder]

But certainly not always

he's also got a text-only site

[rnturn]

And a good thing too, since the graphical version should be considered broken since it uses absolute pixel counts rather than percentages when defining table widths.

:-)

Re:he's also got a text-only site

[Anonymous Coward]

That's likely done with some sort of microsoft software. Real men use vi and edit their table widths by hand.

Re:he's also got a text-only site

[Anonymous Coward]

Please explain...

There should be a LAW!

[Iffy Bonzoolie]

Well, it's one thing to be against a law or a practice, and it's another to pass legislation concerning it. America already has WAY too much legislation for it's own good. About everything.

Most laws, like this one, restrict freedom by requiring an entity either to do something (like file taxes or put labels on products), or not do something (murder, rape, pillage, etc). Many of these laws are good and neccessary, specifically the ones that are against one person directly harming another, or limiting their freedom. I'm glad murder is illegal.

But forcing people to put labels on things for this reason is going too far. It doesn't matter whether it's for explicit lyrics, or a particular copy-protection scheme, or whatever. Just because I personally think that "explicit lyrics" are okay and copy-protection schemes are bad doesn't make this law better than the other. They are both reducing freedoms further than neccessary, and the WRONG way to go about solving problems. Sure, it's the record companies' freedoms, not the consumers', but you can't have a double standard about these things, otherwise you look like a hypocrite.

This isn't nutritional information, it's not like people have allergies and could die if they don't have this information. This is like the helmet and seat-belt laws... Yes, it's a good idea to wear helmets and seat belts and not to smoke pot, but No the government shouldn't try to make everyone comply with their idea of good, especially since there's no clear way it hurts other people. You generally can return something if it's defective, or it offends you.

If you want to legislate something that will help, make a law that creates a allocates resources to increase awareness of these issues. Create a "COPY PROTECTION FREE" sticker that they can voluntairly put on their CDs, and an ad campaign that informs people about the crappiness of copy protection. These things are non-invasive, they don't force people to do or not to do anything, and they educate people, which is the RIGHT way to go about doing things. And this doesn't even require legislation, anyone could form an organization to do this.

-If

Re:Socialist Bullshit

[Anonymous Coward]

whoever modded this a troll can bite my fuckin' cock

If you think government interference in the marketplace is so cool why don't you march order your dirty hippy ass off to Beijing or Pyonyang

Re:F***ing Democrats

[adzoox]

Let's see, wonder where Jefferson got inspiration for the constution? The Bible in part, perhaps? God (the Christian one) is mentioned SEVERAL times in the constitution. For the first instance read the Preamble.

Jefferson, in his writings attributes, the Bible, Machevelli, Benjamin Franklin, Magna carta, amongst others.

Liberalism is VERY close to Fascism. It is DEMOCRATS who are the main force behind the DMCA. MY STATE'S senator, Fritz Hollings (D) is the biggest sponsor of the Bill. If you can recall, he was also co author to video game violence legislation and TV ratings. How about not modding me down to flamebait without facts!

What if the labels get screwed up?

[Ilan Volow]

If I start seeing eminem CD's being labelled as dolphin-friendly and cans of tuna that I can't copy, I'll known there's a bug in the label making software.

Similar to the DMCRA

[irabinovitch]

Looks like a Senate version of the "Digital Millenium Consumer Rights Act", a bill being worked on in the house. The EFF was/is seeking support for the DMCRA, check EFF.org for an Action Alert on the topic.

Anti-'piracy' technology

[freestyle-fiend]

I don't think the issue is anti-piracy technology. I think the issue is technology that indiscriminately prevents *use*. Such measures promote unauthorised copying, because the best way to get corrupt cds to function is to make a(n analog, if necessary) copy of them and use that on your computer or portable mp3/ogg player.

Buy copy protected CDs and return them on mass

[HumanXX]

Why not buy said CD, return to store saying it will not work in your CD player, requesting that the store get you one without this technology. Once the stores have enough people returning these CDs to them they will start complaining to their suppliers as it will start to cost them more cash to process all of these. I hope they do start marking the CDs up this way so we can all buy and return their dodgy CDs on mass.

Re:Buy copy protected CDs and return them on mass

[Rude Turnip]

To chime in here...do the above and MAKE SURE YOU PUT THE CD ON YOUR CREDIT CARD. CC companies do not like chargebacks. Make the retailers hurt for selling defective merchandise.

I got an Anti-Piracy Solution ...

[Anonymous Coward]

It's called, BUY SOFTWARE you cheap bastards!

Whores.

i dont...

[m1chael]

like having to pay for the bill.

Sony Music Vs. Sony Electronics

[Keill_Randor]

This is the war in a nutshell - (i.e. a civil-war) at Sony - and could be a signpost as to the outcome of the larger global war...

However, things may not look too good atm, but it seems things could get better...

Afterall, the electronics division of Sony makes far more money than the Music side...;-)

Read this...

http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/11.02/sony.ht ml

My (male) smoker friends

[pommiekiwifruit]

always pick the warning about pregnant women. They figure this makes it safe for them.

It's about TIME!!!!

[pkcs11]

Now maybe we'll see the death of illegal file swapping and the subsequent software that permits it. Which means I'll stop seeing negative impacts on my production networks.

Re:F***ing Democrats

[adzoox]

By the way, guys, you don't mod a comment down because you dislike what I say or because I mention God. Especially if you respond with interaction and insight.

GMO organizations

[cgenman]

This reminds me of a longstanding FDA position that the labeling of GMO Free food is misleading if it implies that said food is superior to other foods that are genetically modified. This is not just an idle position, the FDA has acted several times to stop the voluntary labeling of non GMO foods.

I can see the RIAA and the MPAA taking a similar position. I know the FCC's mandate is less restrictive than the FDA's, but the argument could seem compelling in the face of millions of dollars of campaign contributions. Law-abiding citizens should have no reason to violate their shrinkwrap agreements, and the copy control mechanisms are only there to enforce those licences. It would mislead the law-abiding public, the argument would go, to mandate the labeling of protected content because good, modern copy controls are invisible to the end user and in no way degrade the experience. Besides, they would continue, nearly all content is GMO^H^H^H copy controlled one way or another, therefore fears of copy control schemes are unfounded.

Not that I agree with the above arguments, but I can definitely see a certain Harvard professor having those debates with a group of bloodsucking lawyers from LA.

Irradiated Meat?

[Rayonic]

Exactly how does irradiated meat "affect" anybody? I mean, other than being safer than non-sterilized meat.

Generally, only negative aspects of a product need to be labeled, not positive ones. It's up to the manufacturer to advertise it's own positives.

Warez is not cool

[Anonymous Coward]

Warez is stealing. so is file-sharing.

To stop anti-piracy methods becoming more and more annoying and obtrusive their is a simple answer.
BUY MORE STUFF you cheap bastards!

And how is this supposed to work again?

[Anonymous Coward]

"I want people to walk into every store in America and see that the product they're about to buy has restrictions," Wyden said. "Let's take this to the marketplace."

I went to go buy a DVD player a few months ago. I bought a pretty good one, brought it home, installed it and played it. It didn't work right. The screen was going from light to dark, from light to dark and over and over again. I found out after reading the manual it had copy protection built into the DVD and it was because I have a VCR hooked up in line to it somewhere. I took it back to get a different DVD player.

Every single DVD player had this protection. I had no choice to buy one that did not unless I wanted to forget about having a DVD player at all.

I ended up sometime later buying a switchbox that confuses the copy protection.

But the point is: It doesn't matter if labels like this are on consumer devices if every single one of them have the copy protection. We're going to buy one, and the industry/govt knows it.

I'm already speaking at the cash register!

[Anonymous Coward]

I've been a Turbo Tax user for many years ... never used another product. This year I bought H&R Block's Tax Cut only because of the restrictions Intuit included with their product this year. I figure if all my software has special registration keys that I need to get from the manufacturer, if I ever have to replace a computer and reinstall all my software, it's going to be a night mare of customer service calls! Screw that.

As far as the compromising freedom thing and Democrats, I don't get it. Each party wants to compromise freedom, just in different ways. One party's motive is for selfish personal reasons; the other's is for the benefit of others. Makes you want to be a libertarian(!?!?)

What's likely to happen...

[C0deM0nkey]

"We're doing this to thwart piracy in order to make our business more profitable. As a pre-emptive reward, we're lowering the price of our products. Support anti-piracy steps, and we'll pass some of the savings on to you."

Yeah, I know, it's not likely to happen.

Unfortunately, what *is* likely to happen is that non-crippled disks will increase in price while crippled disks remain the same. Now the price *appears* to be lower but nothing has really changed...the RIAA still gets the same amount of money out of you *and* the higher price on "open" CDs encourages you to suck it up and pay the fees for the crippled disk.

Pessimistic, I know...but still likely.

Moderators Suck !!!

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh, yeah, where he get's money is of
no interest. Score that one -1.
Don't even give a reason.

Let's get something straight...

[dosun88888]

--Don't underestimate joe sixpack...

I think there are very few stupid individuals, HOWEVER, the second they make a decision as a group, most become complete ignoramuses. Look at our political parties. Look at our businesses. Look at the laws governing homeowners associations all over the country (Esp. Nevada). Look at the fact that some people actually think that the new airport security regulations are making anything safer than it was before.

The government knows how dumb people are as a group, or else they wouldn't throw placebos at us on a daily basis to make us "feel safe" and so on.

"Joe sixpack" may be a very intelligent person on his own, but in a group he has proven to be a complete idiot.

It's shocking, actually.

BTW - I think the legislation is a fine idea, just that your comment was silly as hell.

~D

Come off it.

[Anonymous Coward]

Why do people from your obscure little cult insist upon trying to foist your perversions of the english language upon the rest of us more rational people?

Re:Come off it.

[The Cydonian]

Why do people from your obscure little cult insist upon trying to foist your perversions of the english language upon the rest of us more rational people?

Umm, because it will take us to hea.., err, Oregon?

when you pirate it, can you sue them?

[Anonymous Coward]

I mean comeon, if you circumvent the "anti-piracy" disk, then surely you can sue the manufacturer for false and deceptive labeling!

crap, right effort wrong implementation

[Anonymous Coward]

I think we just need to better enforce existing laws so that if someone buys an item that is labled for example "CD Music" and does not run as "CD Music" then you are allowed to get a full refund including shipping. Mistakes happen but if it is willful then you get them for false advertisement.

What if I popped in some gas in my car only to find out later that it would not start (or worse was corroding or gumming my engine)? Would I really need a special law just to prevent that and force them to put a label saying in effect, "Even though this pump is right next to all the normal gas pumps, looks the same down to color coding, and even though we call this unleaded you are supposed to know the 25 digit code found in small writing under the dirty nozel that indicates this is in fact not intended for cars except the brand new "Gas DRM" models... sorry for the confusion, pull up to the next pump"

Remember that if the companies want to play ambigous games then consumers can simply show a little sack and quit purchasing from them. Stop running to big brother and show a little backbone. Stop being fucking monkeys and be human beings! WILLPOWER, USE IT

How about Politician labeling?

[Zhe Mappel]

I propose the following language be applied on the forehead or, if more prominent, the buttocks of every politician:

WARNING: Any rhetoric or action originating from this creature is to be taken with a grain of salt. (If a grain of salt is unavailable, insert fingers in each ear and pray for it to be struck by laryngitis or an invitation from a lobbyist to dinner.) Pious, hypocritical, rapacious and unforgivably dull, the bearer of this label is a servant of interests little caring for the habits of democracy and even less for those of freedom. Watch your wallet around it. Do not feed or pet it. When it tells you the weather is clear, carry an umbrella; and when it tells you to cower, stand tall. Above all, be certain to routinely vote it out of office lest it take root there, grow to scraggly untamable heights, attract blackbirds, and block your view of the sun.

Captain Morgan's shiny coaster

[quintessencesluglord]

I think the labeling is a bad idea because, in a way, it legitimizes what the RIAA is doing (effectively absolving fair-use rights). The perfect copy thing gets way too much press (if I re-EQ a CD to record, is it an exact copy? The code is different. Argue it either way.). What about copying a CD that is out of print? What about making a 32 bit re-master? Fair-use rights supercede the DCMA (grand-father clause). If the RIAA wants copyright protections, they can spend the funds to develop a system that does not interfere with fair-use rights. All this shouldn't be on anyone else's head. Or start suing them under lemon laws. Two can play this game. Vinyl is looking pretty tasty right now.

Deeper truth of "Lorem"

[aphor]

I have to admit, this is even better Lorem than the "son of Lorem."

Does anyone want to explain the theory behind how these generators work?

The aphorism: In a bad drought, texan ranchers will burn the needles off the cactus once the grass and other foliage has been razed by the starving cattle. The cactus provides no nutrition, but the cattle don't seem to suffer their empty stomachs. This keeps them from trying to emigrate in the mean time. It's interesting how a banal thing can be an instrument of slavery.