Slashdot Mirror
Library of Congress to Hold DMCA Hearings
petong writes "The Library of Congress's Copyright Office will be holding hearings to find out if changes need to be made to the DMCA, according to News.com.
'Anyone with strong feelings about the DMCA, one way or another, may submit a request by Apr. 1 to testify during the public forums, the Copyright Office said in its announcement. The hearing dates in the U.S. capital will be Apr. 11, Apr. 15 and May 2. The dates and locations in California have not been set yet.'"
It'd be nice if we got listened to this time.
Who bitch and moan and cry about the DMCA who don't submit to make your voice heard in a forum that actually matters (it's true.. /. doesn't matter) are hypocrites. (I'd wager a few bananas that's pretty much all of you).
Anyone with strong feelings about the DMCA, one way or another, may submit a request by Apr. 1 to testify during the public forums,
will this be the first physical slashdoting ever?
IP law is supposed to promote innovation, but it has quite the opposite effect. We have really annhiliated the original 14 years was.
Why not just pick a different value for each medium. Books get 30 years. Drugs get 5 years. Videogames get 7 years... etc.
Considering the huge amount of "article time" given to YRO and the DMCA over the last while, I would expect that there will be many people taking advantage of this. In fact, there are very many of you out there that would be quite foolish to not take this opportunity... hypocritical even!
This is going to be like that old political standby... if you don't vote, then you can't complain about the results. The difference here is that there actually is a good candidate that you can vote for!
I moderate "-1, Fool"
Because life does not stop because a war is going on. I don't think life will ever be on topic
That's pretty cynical, but then again, we are talking about the US here. The difference here is that this is an 'official' hearing... theoretically the results will be taken into account by the government, unlike the mass of unorganized and unofficial protests that have all come before it.
So, I suggest that before you go too deep into the 'ignorant peasants and loss of liberty' stuff that you give it a shot and see what happens. Otherwise you're pegging yourself as a hypocrite. "DMCA bad! DMCA bad! What's that? You're going to listen to us? Uh... no! You're not going to listen, I just know it!" I mean, what do you want them to do, repeal it outright without giving it any thought? This is government people... it takes a bit of momentum to change these things.
I moderate "-1, Fool"
They may not care, but this is our opportunity to actually go on official government record in opposition to the DMCA. The government must at least acknowledge all evidence and testimony that is submitted at a hearing. It's a matter of it being on the government's record.
Testimony becomes the sole property of the Library of Congress. Unauthorized redistribution or reproduction is expressly prohibited. By submitting your request, you agree to these terms and conditions.
The real problem isn't the DMCA - it's copyright monopolies being taken to their logical conclusion. If you don't cut the vine off at the root, then it will never stop trying to choke you off.
It isn't about you, it's about your audience. You won't get treated professionally if you don't look professional. That's just the way the world works. It doesn't matter how sage your points are if noone is listening.
Wake up, you are in the real world.
People in authority are far more likly to listen to you if you dress approprietly.
Politcians and lawyers where suits because they know this.
It shouldn't matter, but it DOES matter.
Everybody should have at least 1 suit, perferrably 3 Black, grey, and blue. Get them tailored so they're are more comfortable.
Black:weddings and funerals.
Grey:meeting new clients, looking for work/contracts
Blue: Business dinner, Meeting with established clients, Back-up for business trips.
This is a reality of society. I write code, generally I am in levis/dockers and a button shirt. I don't like ties, but there are occasions where they should be worn.
Even rock stars wear suits to court.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Bad argument, for two reasons. First, imagine trying to get through to anyone but a geek with it. Second, one could also convert computer viruses, kiddie porn, or lists of stolen credit card numbers to prime numbers, but this does not make the laws against possessing them nonsensical.
Give the EFF a few bucks.
Support those who can attend.
The first one seems more realistic for those like myself who are stuck in the Midwest on the wrong side of everything. the second is for those of you who are more daring or better connected with people with strong feelings on the issue.
Life is tough. It's tougher if you're stupid. --John Wayne
Educating our legislators is key to all efforts. The supporters of DMCA have very effectively managed to make this all about college students downloading MP3s and bands of overseas pirates selling bootlegged DVDs.
During the last election cycle I spoke with a congressional candidate about the evils of the DMCA and his only take on it was something needed to be done about blackmarket videos. And this from someone I considered an otherwise reasonable, intelligent candidate.
Sadly, what is needed is a soundbite arguement to stick in the mind of those for whom soundbites are all that can be recalled.
Here's a discussion quesiton: if the DMCA had be in force in 1980, would Compaq computer's PC clone have been illegal? If not, wouldn't a simple XOR encryption make cloning 'circumvention' and thus illegal? What effect would the DMCA have had on the fantastic growth of the PC clone industry if clones were illegal, not to mention Microsoft's fantastic profits?
Next: The Lexmark toner cartridge case. Isn't it dangerous to allow manufacturers to totally lock in parts and supplies simply by putting a microcontroller in it, which must be reverse engineered to create? Consider this hypothetical: GM makes 'smart' brake shoes, with embedded controllers and software (say they monitor temperature and wear). Couldn't GM then use the DMCA to make any competitive brake shoes illegal, thus creating a monopoly on replacement parts and charging whatever price they want for them? Would you want to have to buy a 'smart air filter' for your car for $250, with only one legal source of them?
try { do() || do_not(); } catch (JediException err) { yoda(err); }