Public Hearing On Copyright Circumvention

TimButterfield writes "PUBLIC HEARING SCHEDULE AMENDED (68 FR 19966) The Copyright Office of the Library of Congress is scheduling two new days of public hearings in Washington, D.C., on the possible exemptions to the prohibition against circumvention of technological measures that control access to copyrighted works. In addition, the Copyright Office has cancelled two previously scheduled dates. Public hearings will now be held in Washington, D.C., on Thursday, May 1, 2003, beginning at 2:00 p.m. and on Friday, May 9, 2003, beginning at 9:30 a.m. The Washington, D.C., public hearings will be held at the Postal Rate Commission, 1333 H Street, N.W., Third Floor, Washington, D.C. The public hearings previously scheduled for April 15 and April 30, 2003, have been cancelled. The public hearing scheduled for May 2, 2003, will be conducted at the Postal Rate Commission at 9:30 a.m. As previously announced, hearings will also take place on May 14 and 15 at the UCLA Law School in Los Angeles, Calif. For more information, see the Copyright Office website."

Comments

Same crap

[Anonymous Coward]

Ban everything!

Entertain yourself

Issues Websites?

[greenhide]

Although I'd be happy to lend whatever support I could to defending consumer rights in this area, I'm afraid I just don't know enough about the issues involved. I've ready plenty of Slashdot articles in the past, all of which go on and on about intellectual property laws becoming increasingly invasive. Most of these discussions devolve into invectives (is that the right word?...I think so...) against the DMCA, the RIAA, the MPAA, etc.

However, it'd be nice to be pointed to some specific websites that discuss the issues, specific legislation or regulations under review.

For instance, if I were to go to the hearing, what questions can I/should I ask? Will I be able to present any opinions or viewpoints, and what should they be on? I myself am tired of being one of the ones who moans and complains about these issues but then doesn't do anything about it. I'd like to be informed so I can act.

Thanks.

Re:Issues Websites?

[dotgod]

Public hearing is refering to a hearing everyone can watch, not a hearing where anybody who wants can just go say whatever they want.

So Who's Going, Huh?

[portege00]

I'm wondering how many Slashdotters that are always quick to proclaim the evils of the DCMA will actually show up? You'll have a much more profound effect on bad laws if you do than by sitting at home racking up karma.

Re:So Who's Going, Huh?

[program21]

I'll be there on May 2.

Because No One Ever Visits the Website

[greenhide]

Here's what's on the agenda for the May 1st meeting:

Exemption for literary works/eBooks for persons with disabilities

And on the 2nd:

Motion pictures and audiovisual works:

DVD tethering/alternative platforms
DVD backups/noninfringing uses
DVD/Video Game Region Coding

Literary works:

Damaged, malfunctioning, obsolete
Other noninfringing uses

Of all of the issues, I think the DVD issues would be of highest interest to Slashdotters, right? Sounds like issues might include viewing DVDs on Linux (ie, DeCSS) and, of course, region encoding is always an issue.

If no one else can make the May 2nd hearing, I suppose I'd be willing to make the trip (2+ hours), but if there's anyone who already lives in DC, and, better yet, gets Fridays off, that'd be even better.

Since it seems this public hearing isn't open to public comment/participation (some are), it may be that we can just keep our eyes glued on the site and look for transcripts/summaries of the hearings to get further insight.

Re:Because No One Ever Visits the Website

[program21]

Full schedule w/ names.

I'll be testifying at the May 2nd hearing, regarding playback of media on operating systems such as Linux.

Re:Because No One Ever Visits the Website

[orn]

When you testify, how about pointing out this: before the whole fiasco about DeCSS, etc. came up, playing DVDs on Linux was below the radar screen. Sure there were linux people clamoring for it, but no one was seriously implementing it.

By locking down exactly what you can do with a media, you close off the possibilities for future innovation.

Sad news:( Edgar Codd,database theorist,dead at 79

[Anonymous Coward]

I just heard some sad news on talk radio - Database theorist Edgar Frank Codd was found dead in his Florida home this morning. There weren't any more details. I'm sure everyone in the Slashdot community will miss him - even if you didn't enjoy his work, there's no denying his contributions to computer science. Truly an American icon.

You are not paying attention

[linuxwrangler]

These issues have been so widely discussed on Slashdot that you should have been able to follow a few of the links and do somesearch. For privacy/copyright/patent/piracy issues start reading through and following links from this starter list:

EFF
Lawrence Lessig
EPIC
Consumer's Union
Forbes (search for articles on copyright, patents, or intellectual property
Eldred

Re:CLEAN VODKA AND A RIVER OF FECES

[Anonymous Coward]

*****BOOOOOMMMMMM*****
*SPLORT*

Lameness filter encountered. Post aborted!
Reason: Don't use so many caps. It's like YELLING.

Copyright is a necessity

[Michael's a Jerk!]

All the slashbots constantly whinge about how copywrite is wrong, patents are obsolete. Let's imagine a world where there is *no* IP. Making a living as a programmer is no longer viable. The whole field of software development will grind to a standstill.

Do you think patents stiffile inovation? Imagine a world where if you invent something really cool, all the major hardware companies will mass-produce cheap knockoffs within weeks. You have no incentive to design at all. Companies will grow ever larger.

IP might be a bad thing, but it's the lesser of 2 evils.

Re:Copyright is a necessity

[freestyle-fiend]

All the slashbots constantly whinge about how copywrite is wrong, patents are obsolete.

I don't think that this true. A lot of people believe that copyright gives legal 'rights' that copyright holders ought not to exercise universally, or that action taken to prevent or punish copyright violations is inappropriate. I think that the complaint is not about patents themselves, but about incompetence and about abuse of the legal process.

Of course, some people really do believe that patents and copyrights are not necessary, but they are a small minority. I agree with them in principle, but pragmatically I think all that is needed is a reversal of recent changes to copyright law and a substantial clamp down on bad patents and the power of groundless patent cases to cost the defendant money.

Let's imagine a world where there is *no* IP. Making a living as a programmer is no longer viable. The whole field of software development will grind to a standstill.

The success of Free Software tends to suggest otherwise.

Do you think patents stiffile inovation?

No. I think that copyrights stiffle creativity. In a (to a large extent) free-market economy, patents promote innovation, unless they are awarded to the wrong party, or for a really obvious 'innovation'. Patent holders taking groundless legal action stiffles innovation.

Imagine a world where if you invent something really cool, all the major hardware companies will mass-produce cheap knockoffs within weeks.

How would patents help me? I will probably have to work with many others and and build on past innovations to invent something really cool. If I have many employees and enough money to license the necessary patents (and apply for my own) then how different from a major hardware company do I look?

If I don't have lots of money and expertise (including other people's) will patents 'protect' my innovations? Will I have any innovations to 'protect'?

You have no incentive to design at all.

Actually, the result is that I have no incentive to publish details of my innovation. Patents are supposed to encourage innovators to disclose details of their innovations. I can still maufacture my product without patents and without anyone knowing exactly how it works for some time.

Companies will grow ever larger.

This seems to be happening anyway.

Re:Copyright is a necessity

[Anonymous Coward]

Companies hire programmers because they need something done that is not already available. Let's say a company needs some specialized DB. They hire someone to implement it. How will the non-existence of IP change the fact that the company needs the DB? How will the non-existence of IP change the fact that they need to hire someone to write it? Without copyright, certain standard solutions would not be mass-marketed such as Microsoft Office, because then everyone could copy them. But this does not remove the need for these applications. Rather than being sold in stores, they would only be available with individual contracts (which can restrict the purchaser's ability to copy just as copyright law does now). There are other possibilities, of course, such as subscription-based models. It doesn't matter if you can freely copy a MMORPG client if you can't log in without a subscription. There a plenty of business models that work without copyright and they all involve software development. Abolishing IP laws would not remove the need for (paid) programmers. In fact it will probably strengthen the individual programmer because there'll be much more need for contract work as fewer standard solutions will be available.
I (as a programmer) do not fear a world without copyright.

Re:Copyright is a necessity

[clonebarkins]

Let's imagine a world where there is *no* IP.

There already was a world like that: it's called "Earth before 1709". Quite a few innovators lived there, so I've heard....

We have a loop hole gentlemen.

[the-erm]

Ok I was on another board, and I thought about it.

"Turkey" Drug.

In the state I live in there is a turkey drug law. If you try and sell asprin, and say it's acid. You can go to jail for the exact same amount of time as if it were acid.

So thinking along these lines, if record companies are posting files on these p2p networks and distributing them as if it were the real thing, shouldn't they get fined too?

:)

Just a thought.