Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

State "Communication Services" Laws Analyzed

Posted by michael on from the read-it-and-weep dept.

87C751 writes "There has already been some discussion about Michigan and other states implementing new laws to protect "communication services", with results that could ban NAT, VPNs and even email encryption. Mike Godwin, of EFF fame, has looked into this subject a bit deeper, and makes a frightening observation. Among other things, this PDF report draws an ugly conclusion: As written, these "mini-DMCA" acts change the legislative focus radically, such that all technology that is not expressly permitted by a communications provider will be prohibited. Is this the backdoor maneuver that will turn the net into television once and for all?"

14 of 293 comments (clear)

  1. You adopt IPv6.... by Angry+White+Guy · · Score: 4, Funny

    And I'll drop my NAT box in a heartbeat.

    But don't fuck with my VPN!

    --
    You think that I'm crazy, you should see this guy!
    1. Re:You adopt IPv6.... by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 5, Funny

      >> And I'll drop my NAT box in a heartbeat.

      Your future monthly cable bill without NAT:

      Basic channels: $23.95
      Premium channels: $12.95
      Internet connection: $19.95
      First system IP address: $17.95
      Second system IP address: $15.95
      Firewall IP address: $15.95
      Video Recorder IP address: $15.95
      Game box IP address: $15.95
      Printer IP address: $8.95
      VPN Fee (1 destination): $29.95
      Voice over IP fee: $24.95
      Local taxes: $17.54
      Federal taxes: $22.45

      Total: 242.44

    2. Re:You adopt IPv6.... by Amer · · Score: 3, Funny

      Your forgot: Refrigerator IP address: $15.95 Groceries over IP Subscription: $5.95

      --
      -- To gain that which is worth having, it may be necessary to lose everything else. Bernadette Devlin McAliskey
    3. Re:You adopt IPv6.... by Mr+Z · · Score: 2, Funny

      The look on your face as you open the bill? Priceless.

      --
      Program Intellivision!
  2. Godwin's law by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Mike Godwin, of EFF fame, has looked into this subject a bit deeper, and makes a frightening observation.

    He didn't compare the laws to the Nazis, did he?

  3. Already happened by L.+VeGas · · Score: 3, Funny

    Is this the backdoor maneuver that will turn the net into television ..?

    Nah, I think AOl did that.

    --
    Best Windows Freeware
  4. This just in... by MimsyBoro · · Score: 5, Funny

    It has been reported that a new law has been passed in the United States, all posts to /. require a valid username/password pair. This is to avoid those anoying "My dog does yo mama" posts that seem to come from the "Anonymous Coward" terroist group. As the official spokesperson for the group Mohammed Saeed al-Sahaf claims: "There have been no 'Anonymous Coward Posts' since early last year." In another unrelated comment he claimed: "There are no dupes in /."

    --
    God made the natural numbers; all else is the work of man - Kronecker
  5. question, answer by RLiegh · · Score: 3, Funny

    Is this the backdoor maneuver that will turn the net into television once and for all?"

    In a word: yes.

    I'm convinced all those goatse links were preparation for that eventuality, too.
  6. Re:I imagine by L.+VeGas · · Score: 2, Funny

    adopt IPv6 and NATs will fade away.

    Now we know what to do about nats, ipv7 for houseflies?

    --
    Best Windows Freeware
  7. But it's for security! by burgburgburg · · Score: 3, Funny
    Keeping networks open allows us to properly monitor them, to ensure that they haven't been compromised by terrorists. And allowing ISPs to properly profit from providing such a valuable service is protecting US business interests, which protects the country. And installing those monitoring/tracking chips in your skulls while you sleep protects you, both from kidnapping by non-governmentally approved organizations and thought crimes which can come unbidden to the inproperly trained.

    Remember, AC isn't anonymous to us. So stop complaining, sit down, take your medication and watch some TV.

    1. Re:But it's for security! by brotherscrim · · Score: 3, Funny

      Nice post, but you forgot to explain how this is all "for the children."

  8. When they outlaw NATs... by DarkLurker · · Score: 1, Funny

    ...Only Outlaws will have NATs!

    Or how about:

    They can take my Coyote Linux box when they pry it from my cold dead fingers!

    Can you tell I'm a Southerner???

    Windows is Dead!
    Long Live Tux!!!

    --

    Windows is dead!
    Long Live Tux!!!
    1. Re:When they outlaw NATs... by RLiegh · · Score: 2, Funny

      So you know this one, then: "The GNU will rise again!" ;)

  9. Re:NAT-based firewalling? by ajs · · Score: 2, Funny

    So, if I'm prohibited to use NAT-based firewalling, who's going to take responsibility for securing my home LAN?

    Home LAN?! Was that expressly provided for in your agreement with your service provider?!

    I think you're going to have to rip out those cables before the FBI gets to your house, buddy!