Slashdot Mirror
Lofgren Introduces BALANCE Act to Modify DMCA
Infonaut writes "Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D - CA) introduced H.R. 1066, The Balance Act. It seeks to clarify 'that America's historic principles of fair use - protected under Section 107 of the Copyright Act - apply to analog and digital transmissions.' Apparently Lessig is on board, as are several associations and other organizations. If you like what you see, encourage your representative to support the bill."
Attorney for Duff: "That party-hardy attitude is a registered copyright of the Duff Brewing Corportation."
Duffman: "What ever happened to fair use?"
it's about time someone realizes that just becase it's made of 1's and 0's it's still just a recording, and protected under fair use.
if they keep this up, I'll have to transfer all my mp3's and ogg's over to tape.
THE WORLD IS GOING TO END!!!! eventually.
clearly a clued up congressional representative. See also her remarks on p2p here
" Illegal file-sharing is a major problem. But we should not create one problem to solve another."
She'd get my vote...
we'll, if I had one over there...
-he who laughs last, is a bit slow.
journal
- Let's add the following to the DMCA:
- You are allowed to back up the stuff you've bought legally, as long as you don't perform it or infringe on the rights of the owners by selling it
- You cannot sell media covered by the DMCA with a non-negotiable license because said license is unenforceable as of now.
- You can do whatever you need to do in order to watch the media, as long as you don't go against #1.
- If you don't have a way to see/hear/whatever the media is, you can do what you need to in order to see/hear it as long as you don't sell/perform it
Is that about right?Webmaster Wanted - Entropic Reactions
I'm all for the government taking the technology that prevents me from making backup copies of games and music and reducing it to a pile of smoldering dung. Smoldering dung is, in my book, way cooler than an irreplaceable copy of Unreal 2003 that my sister rolls over with my computer chair (hypothetically speaking... grr...)
But let's not forget that there are legitimate concerns about the pirating of software and music. It's not just the RIAA and other large organizations. The widespread pirating of software does, in fact, have the ability to cripple businesses that produce it. As I recall, the guys that made Thief made next to nothing on Thief 2 (and are no longer in business as a result), but everyone I knew had a copy.
So I'm Asking Slashdot <dramatic music>: What should companies be doing to prevent the loss of income from pirating while leaving inviolate the right of the consumer to make copies of materials to which we own legal license?</dramatic music>
I know, I know, we talk about this all the time, but I don't think anyone's offered a suggestion that would really work; this is a tough nut to crack.
Peace,
~SL
Not whorin', just informin'.
Interesteing reference in Section 4 of the legislation:
SECTION 4:
Today, when a consumer purchases a book, they are free to lend their copy to a friend, or to sell their copy to a used books store. Section 4 allows consumers to do the same thing with digital content by extending the first sale doctrine - codified in section 109 of Title 17 - to digital transmissions. At the same time, it protects copyright holders by restricting such transmissions to a single recipient and requiring consumers to transmit their copies with copy-control restrictions in place. Consumers also have to get rid of their copy after they transmit the work to someone else. (underline added by me)
This is good, legal, and just. If only people would do that. Sure it is a pain to delete your copy when you lend it out, or to remember who has it and if they "gave it back" (by deleting their copy or by sending/ftping it back to you).
The real important part of this law is the extension of the fair use to digital works, even if it shouldn't be obviously there by default. Having something expressly writting rather than implied is necessary.
(Simpson's quote regarding illegal practices performed in international waters)
"Over there is a ship re-broadcasting major league baseball with implied oral consent instead of express written consent."
robi
BALANCE is The Benefit Authors without Limiting Advancement or Net Consumer Expectations Act.
Obviously, we need legislation to keep our representatives from wasting too much time thinking up clever acronyms. I would like to propose a bill entitled Legislation Insulated from Acronyms by Representatives.
Oh, wait...
One man's -1 Flamebait is another man's +5 Funny.
I went ahead and read the article... not only does she seem to "get it," she also seems to be trying to put it into law in a relatively unintrusive way... by (a) extending some definitions, (b) codifying into written law some points long held in common law (e.g., those regarding fair use), and (c) definitively casting shrinkwrap licenses as unenforceable to the extent that they might be used to "take away" the Fair Use rights of consumers.
:)
It's a very well-written and fine-tuned attempt to swing the balance of copyright back toward the public again. It's not overreaching (as was the DMCA) and seems to be able to do only what it was intended to do - restore Fair Use - and no more.
It also supports things like DeCSS by making legal the disemmination of tools to allow Fair Use to be exercised IF the copyright holders do not make such means availalbe. This is tantamount to telling the RIAA and MPAA and BSA (Business Software Alliance), "Fair Use is here to stay - so you'd best figure out a way to deal with this issue technologically right now (something they have been VERY reluctant to attempt), instead of beating it to death with legislation. You have your choice - you may choose to find a solution you like - but if you don't/can't/won't address the problem, someone else can now fix it for you whether you like it or not."
Applause for Zoe!
Now, I'm off to write my congresscritter - or perhaps (since her local office is right across the street from where I work), visit in person to make my views on this matter known.
--Posted by myself.
Actually, the EFF says that, post 9/11, email is better than snail mail for this sort of thing. The delay resulting from security checking makes snail mail, in their opinion, a less useful option than email and faxes for activism.
Lofgren introduced the Digital Choice & Freedom Act last term. What ever happened to it?
It had the words "choice" and "freedom" in its title. When Old White Men(tm) see that on their calendar, they think it's going to be some damn fool left-wing crusade that involves the choice to spend the government's money and the freedom to bankrupt the nation.
Sadly, this knee-jerk reaction is right about as often as it is wrong.
This time she's got the right idea, though. She's taken the Republican-friendly non-threatening acronym route and named her bill the Benefit Authors without Limiting Advancement or Net Consumer Expectations (BALANCE) Act of 2003. She'll fit right in with the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism (USA PATRIOT) Act of 2001, the Prosecuting Remedies and Tools Against the Exploitation of Children Today (PROTECT) Act of 2003, and the Help Advance Republicanism through Martial Law Everywhere and the Suspension of Self-determination (HARMLESS) Act of 2005.
I write in my journal
is there a topic that the Simpson's hasn't covered yet? Possibly abortion since I can't recal that ever comming up in an episode
Kang: "Hmm.. Abortions for some, miniature American flags for others."
Crowd: (Cheers)
I find it mildly disturbing that American copyright law ultimately decides the law for the rest of the world
Hey now, you don't want us to give up on copyright inspectors do you? If he doesn't disarm his weapons of mass P2P, then we will disarm him.
Those who would give up liberty in exchange for security and DRM should switch to Microsoft Palladium!
I work in a Congressional district office (Earl Blumenenauer, 3rd District OR), and while I don't speak for other Senator's and Congressman's offices, it doesn't matter whether you call, write, or send an email. Either way, your comments get categorized by the same person, and I don't think we let any slip. Well technically, we have a webform rather than email for constituent comments. If you do want to send snailmail, send it to your District office rather than Washington DC. Mail gets through much faster over here, and it ends up in the same place. Believe me, it's just as easy to misplace snailmail as electronic mail. And not that we would wilfully trash constituent letters, if we wanted to I don't think it would be much of a challenge. Calling is effective. It does take up alot of our time and lets the entire staff know that it's a hotbutton issue (even the people who don't answer the main line have to hear it). Remember to be polite, even if you don't support the representative's stance.