Slashdot Mirror
The MPAA's Lobbying-Fu is Stronger Than Yours
georgelazenby writes "The Frisco Chronicle reports: While the music industry has been clumsily bullying its way through the federal government, the movie industry has taken a more subtle -- and more effective -- approach. The MPAA has been lobbying individual state legislatures to pass laws reaching far beyond the original DMCA. The proposed laws would permit cable TV companies to 'limit subscribers to using only certain brands of VCRs and could ban TiVo in favor of their own proprietary PVR technologies.' According to one expert, the bills are 'tremendously open-ended and create theoretical and potential criminal liabilities for just about anybody on the planet.'"
How would something like this be enforced? House inspections?
BOO! TERRO
>According to one expert, the bills
>are 'tremendously open-ended and create
>theoretical and potential criminal liabilities
>for just about anybody on the planet.'"
What planet? Planet America? US laws sure don't reach us in Europe.
Interesting dynamic that these two groups are taking.
The RIAA is doing a loud, "hey, look, we're gonna erase files and crash your computer" thing, whereas the MPAA is going around quietly passing bills without any press releases or announcements. Wonder which one will be more successful... from the sounds of it, the MPAA has already had a fair amount of success, having their "super-DMCA" laws passed in 6 states and pending in five more. It certainly seems a more proactive approach than the RIAA, but I don't think either will end up working in the end, since MPAA's plans are basically monopolising (you can ONLY use THESE) and the RIAA's plans are basically hacking (you aren't allowed to have these files! DELETE DELETE DELETE)
[insert witty comment here]
Having a system where everybody is a criminal and anybody can be arrested whenever the government want to is scary beyond imagination.
As unfortunate as it is, many laws that stem from the United States DO carry over to other countries. That's just how things work with the US being such a great superpower in the world. One can only hope that other countries will have more sense than Bush and his cronies.
[insert witty comment here]
Without sounding like I'm supporting the MPAA on this (which I most certainly not), one has to at least appreciate the MPAA's awareness of the future of piracy. The fact of the matter is that widespread piracy of DVDs and movies on the scale of MP3s -- that is, copies of the movies that are of such quality as to be almost indistinguishable from the original, as with MP3s -- just isn't here yet. The average user simply does not have the capacity or ability to simply hop on some p2p network and download and burn DVD-quality full length feature films -- yet. A few years down the road, it might not be such an issue to download say, a 1 gig movie, burn it to DVD-R, and watch it in your DVD player with no appreciable loss of quality. The MPAA isn't so much concerned about the (relatively) low quality movies floating around Kazaa today -- they're concerned about tomorrow. And one at least has to respect, however grudgingly, their foresight and awareness of the future -- contrasted with the "catch-up" that the RIAA is playing right now.
First a quote from Dinsdale "DVDs are protected to the hilt," he said "It plays by the rules and ends up being a great consumer experience."
My ass. It makes it a way for me to have to sit through a FBI warning, and as is the case from some of the newer DVD's to have to watch trailers, (read commercials). I dont want that in something I have bought, or rented.
So what can a legal owner or renter of a DVD do? Play it with Linux? Yeah, but then I break the law.
These folks gotta get with the program (pun intended) I want to watch the damn movie!
As an aside: I have not been to a movie theatre in 5 years and I am not about to go anytime soon. When all of them became tiny little multiplexes I just couldn't enjoy it anymore.
Screw you MPAA.
One acronym: EFF
Check out their State-Level "Super DMCA" Initiatives Archive
~ Ms.G {at} NoitacudE [dot]com "Turn it around..."
While I like the article, it doesn't link to anything for the reader to make their own comparison.
The EFF has a Super-DMCA archive, with analyses, the templates the MPAA gives to state legislatures, and info on the individual states.
The MPAA has an anti-piracy statement, and press releases relating to legislation , but I was unable to find anything specifically discussing these particular laws after a brief search.
Actually, that's just what it will take if media corporations expect to survive.
There are two futures:
1) Corporate IP dies and we move to a gift economy.
2) We have to be able to prove ownership every binary string we control on demand.
I vote for a gift economy.
These lobbying groups have a way of creating the problems that they try to fight.
For example: way back in 97 people were using IRC and Hotline and FTP to trade music, and it was under the radar to the mainstream. Then Napster comes along and the RIAA takes notice, and a staggering number of news stories announces to the public that it's possible to trade music online. The RIAA was the reason for the popularity of napster. And inderectly they are also responsible for the rise in popularity of trading movies on the net because of the migration to morpheus after napster's demise.
Lobbying groups like the RIAA and the MPAA are doing a great service to the cause of piracy.
I wonder why they don't see that.
We have caught the sniper like a duck in a noose. We understand that hearing us say this is important to you...
Great! In other news, RIAA proposes a tax on candles stating that, "wax cylinders are are of the earliest recording technoligies, and we are in danger of loosing valuable dollars with this presently unrestricted technology". Also on record, "Candles can be used to create recordings with very low technology, and we can't allow this." This form of piracy has the record companies scared as they tend to burn well destroying all evidence.
RIAA also plans to sue a little girl in Beaverton Oregon for recording, "Mary had a Little Lamb".
There is no sanctuary. There is no sanctuary. SHUT UP! There is no shut up. There is no shut up.
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
Given that many commercial PVRs call home, if the MPAA has it's way, they'll get all the subscriber lists and track down each and every unit.
They'll treat PVR owners like criminals (look at law-abiding gun owners for examples of how your basic rights can be abused), and unless you can come up with enough money to buy a law keeping them from sticking it to you, you're going to have to take it. Or else, become a criminal, and hide your PVR in your basement...
I find it ironic that there's a Ad Council spot with a bunch of parishoners holding church services in somebody's basement because they're afraid they'll be arrested, and then afterwards a little blurb about how we should be thankful for freedom of religion. At the rate our rights are getting bought out by the corporations (who although are legal entities, aren't even voting citizens, damnit) freedom of religion is probably all we'll have left - and that's if we're lucky.
That will be the end of them, and good riddance.
The end of the MPAA or the end of the Tivo? There are only 650,000 Tivo subscribers. Cutting off part of their market could easily kill the company (especially if a cable monopoly decides to standardize on the lowest common denominator, and bans Tivos even in states where Tivos are still legal, just because a big chunk of their cable network is in a Tivo-illegal state.) You don't want them to be hogtied until someone overturns the law in court - they might be bankrupt by then. Best thing to do is preemptively fight (for example, the SonicBlue subscribers preemptively sued the studios for the right to use ReplayTV units to timeshift and share shows.)
Don't let the enemy define where and when you fight - you must be the one to control the battlefield.
As with everything in life there are exeptions but as far as the general impression I get from USA these days..I'm simply disgusted.. disgusted in that the american people let Bush steal the election (YEA HE DID!!).. disgusted in how the american government has abused the WTC catastrophy to get all sorts of severely abusive laws in place and how the public has let them.. disgusted at how fucked up the american so called justice system is, they call it justice but it does nothing but fulfill a lot of triggerhappy gunslinging angry revengeful peoples thirst for blood.. America has gone from admireable to just downright disgusting.. I pray and hope that the majority of the American population will see the light soon and DO something about the situation instead of just sitting idly by. I get blased with ppl telling me that the general american population does NOT agree with what the government is doing but until all those who claim to be part of that need to GET OFF THEIR ASSES and DO something about the situation and then you need to come join the rest of the world instead of seeing yourself as superior to everyone else, as history proves over and over and over again.. whenever someone think they're better than anyone else.. there will be revolution. I feat that WTC was just the start of that.
Please dont ruin the world and freedom for the rest of us.
It is unfortunate that things have to go this way, but until this silliness is brought home-- literally-- the masses can't get behind any effort to put a stop to it.
Does the DMCA make life difficult or inconvenient for your family or non-technical friends? Probably not. Not in a way that they notice or associate with anything in particular. Not being able to rip music CDs may impact a reasonable chunk of the voting public, but no critical mass there.
Wait until your parents want to Tivo their favorite TV show or a movie on a premium station that they pay extra for, but they find out that not only can they not record that show or movie, but in fact the Tivo is not really functional at all anymore... and maybe their VCR doesn't record everything they want, either.
When voters are effected by this stuff, and when they are effected enough so that they get angry, matters like this will suddenly get the attention they deserve. So long as lobbyists and campaign contributors are the only ones making noise, there won't be anything reasonable coming out of our politicians.
At least FCC Chairman Michael Powell likes his Tivo, so maybe there will be some advocacy there. Maybe.
Back in the day, the commoners were only allowed to read the bible. People were persecuted for writing books with "subversive" or "heretical" thoughts and others for reading them. Scientists and scholars alike lived under the yoke of the church.
:)
Fast forward back to today.
We are on the precipace of a technological dark age.
Basic freedoms are being summarily dismissed when it comes to anything "technological" under the guise of "Intellectual Property and Copywrite Protection" as well as "Security Considerations"
Think I'm paranoid?
Maybe, but here's a couple quick comparisons:
1600AD: All one has to do is cry " Witch!!" and the accused was immediately persecuted.
2003AD: All one has to say is "MP3 Pirate!!!" And that person is immediately subject to persecution.
1632AD: Galileo's The Dialogue Concerning the Chief World Systems was printed -- The ideas in this book leads to his arrest/trail/imprisonment
2001AD: Dmitry Sklyarov arrested for writing software that was alleged to violate the DMCA
Ironic ain't it
One thing I really wish the RIAA and MPAA would SERIOUSLY crack down on and even make REWARD laws to police departments is Flea Markets. My local flea markets are FULL of people selling knockoffs and CDRs of both movies and say 50 cent/Eminem. And yes these people ARE different than file sharers because they are PURPOSELY trying to make money off of someone else's work. They are NOT sharing it without financial gain as "napster/kazaa users do".
Rather than privacy intrusive laws like the article mentions and really even as DMCA is, I wish states would consider the battle more local and leave the organizations out of it. Instead, be more concerned for the taxable commerce in their state.
I have always been concerned when the corporate world feels like they have the right to justice on their own without the law. Cable companies, Music companies, Movie companies (most are all 3) are beginning to be able to carry out vigilante justice on the public.
Yell & scream & rant & rave... it's no use... you need a shaaaave ~ Bugs Bunny
You put the latest James Bond movie in your player, and your player (by law) automatically connects with your bank and credit card accounts. It sees you have made several purchases of Pepsi products in the past year, but no Coca Cola products. Unfortunately, as Coca Cola is a major advertiser^Wsponsor of the movie, you are barred from watching it -- it's required by law that you purchase products associated with "sponsors" in order to "protect the artists" who are making films. A pleasant voiceover says you must make a purchase of at least $45.83 in Coca Cola products to be qualified for the film.
Joking aside, the disrespect these organizations (and their backers) show for their consumers is astounding. This bunker mentality is resulting in an unnecessary war which both the recording/movie industries and consumers will lose. The industries will lose because people will stop buying their products. The consumers will lose due to the laws restricting their legal rights.
Move over government, this is the century of the mega-corp.
-Thomas
After sending forward the EFF's letter, as well as one of my own through physical mail, I got an E-mail message from Rob Briley, the TN House rep supporting the TN law. He said that those who opposed the law hadn't read the amendment, and that terrible amounts of misinformation were being spread about it. (I wrote back telling him that even with his amendment, I really didn't want that law.) In particular, he said that he had never been contacted by the MPAA, and wondered why people thought that.
Given that this TN law is like the others and coming at the same time, I'm suspicious. It's possible that this just happened to come up on its own and be similar. More likely, though, Briley was contacted by somebody trying to get him to push this law. It's possible Briley is just lying to me, but it's also entirely plausible that Briely doesn't even know he's being used as a pawn of the MPAA.
Gotta love this country.
tndigitalfreedom.org has an account of several people showing up at a senate commitee hearing on the law. It was clear that most of the sentaors simply didn't understand the implication of the law... and they were relying on a cable industry guy to interpret it for them. When they learned that perhaps there were other things to worry about, they delayed passing the law out of committee. The alarming thing about this is that even though the senators showed a desire to do the right thing once they learned of worries, it does mean that it would have just rubber stamped through if the tndigitialfreedom people hadn't showed up. In other words, our state legislatures are probably passing laws they don't understand all the time, just because whatever industry lobbyist is interpreting it for them makes them feel all warm and fuzzy about it.
Great, huh?
-Rob
I think more scary than the movie industry thwarting technological and artistic advance for their own financial gain, is the fact that powerful interests can literally sneak bills into law with absolutely zero debate. Not good.
<a href="http://www.joblessjimmy.com">Work is dumb and so is Jobless Jimmy.</a>
--an even further analysis shows that at some point "IP" as property is going to be fairly silly. What would a geek really want in his kitchen? A star trek replicator? How would the farmers pay their bills then, once their job and work is outdistanced by available technology?
What this is is an example of the age old rift between protectionism and advances in technology and more open markets. The paradigm of the IP creator being a full time "worker" who garners all his wage with producing those works has always changed over time. At one point only the royals were rich enough to "own" a painting, or to keep a court musician on the payroll, or to have "theater on demand". Only a few owned books, because of the monopoly of the royal religious scribes, who hand copied bibles etc.
Right now we are at a major crossroads again, as the technology already exists to make a large part of "IP" business obsolete. That's why they are pulling out all the stops, they right now can be replaced. So you then have to ask, which parts still require "protectionism".
I find this sort of amusing, moving in political circles where up into about two years ago, white collar workers were sneering at blue collar workers as their jobs got "outsourced" and "made redundant" by advances in technology and the markets. Myself being a blue collar worker noted that is was few and far between that I could see much support (on the web in forums) from much higher paid people than I, working in "still vibrant" economies such as IT/IP. I got laughed at, put down, told to STFU, that my "work" was buggy whip work that modernization and automation and the "free market" made obsolete, so tough luck. Now that THEIR paycheck is threatened, by outsourcing and automation,by improvements in technology, by the skills required to produce this sort of "product" becoming lower and easier, etc, they are crying foul, FOUL they say,they are "wondering how they will feed their families and pay their mortgage".
Well, same thing I kept getting told and keep getting told, at a retirement (or close enough) age, "learn a new skill, perhaps the old one isn't as relevant any more, keep up with the times, pull yourself up with your boot straps" and etc.
SUCKS to get told that doesn't it? Pretty easy to slam it out when it's someone else, isn't it, real easy? But it SUCKS to take it, doesn't it,. sucks to be honest, to actually SEE reality.
"IP" busy-ness and it's related side "jobs" as a full time "job" is rapidly being replaced with automation and ease-of-accomplisment.
GASP, OH NO!!! Geeks who type arcane symbols fall out of chairs all over, "artistes" swoon and get the economic vapors, middle man skimmers get red in the face, demand "laws, we say MORE,MORE, AND MORE LAWS!!! TO PROTECT....." Whatever. Whoops, you are demanding "protectioinism". wow.
It is no different from ANY other industry, nothing special or magical about anyone's "job" there. You never got handed a lifelong job/profit guarantee. Joe Bubba in the factiory doesn't have it, and is losing bigtime, told to "get with the program". Joe Farmer at the family farm is going through it. Where is it carved in stone that programmers and entertainment "artistes" and middle man "trader-skimmers" are guaranteed a full time job that "pays all the bills"?
Soon-perhaps- it will be possible for the end user-the consumer-to "program on demand" applications exactly like they want them. What then? Soon it will be possible to have huge amounts of "entertainments" created-not even copied but CREATED "on demand", cheaply and at the single consumer level. If anyone forgot, it was blacksmiths that "put themselves out of business". The metal workers did it to themselves. today, engineers are putting themselves out of business, as they concentrate on automation-even with their own jobs! When I was a kid, AUTOCAD did NOT exist.
Where do you draw the line on advances in technology? Should we still be paying scribes to hand copy books? At one time it was
The following scenarios are why the MPAA and this corporate IP nonsense needs to be stopped.
... transmit, [or] re-transmit" any communication service without the "express authorization" of the communication service provider."[1] The benevolent provider when pushed to find a reason to terminate the user's connectivity - can easily find one. And then the MPAA and RIAA can do as they wish with you.
Your cable provider sends a notice to all of its customers. It says that due to recent changes in local legislation that only Dell GX150 Desktop machines can be used with their cable internet service. All other equipment is no longer authorized to connect to the internet via the cable service. This then qualifies all non Dell GX150 devices that are communicating with the cable network as "unauthorized"[1]. Depending on how the courts interpret the law - this could make all "unauthorized communications devices"[1] (non-GX150), "unlawful access devices"[1]. A user in possession of an unlawful access device could then be prosecuted under this law for using a system that is not a Dell GX150.
Certainly that is an extreme example though not completely implausible under the current stipulations in the law. It would be useful though to examine a more realistic scenario:
The law is passed in your state legislature - but there are no apparent changes in policy with your service provider (the aforementioned cable provider). In the coming months and years after the law is passed, the MPAA and RIAA find out that there is a "malicious" user illegally "swapping" large amounts of "unlicensed" music in the form of MP3's over the cable provider's network. The RIAA and MPAA approach the cable provider about this user and threaten legal action against the cable company if it does not terminate the user's connectivity. The cable company, would have an easy time under this law finding "unauthorized" devices that are connected to their network,. There are provisions that make it a "crime to "receive
The real problem with this law is the broad terminology used and the fact that it can be so easily used to deny ANYONE communications services. The term "communications device" can mean anything. The dictionary definition of the term "device" could be argued to include network protocols as a "device for communicating", or even software that you have written that uses a network provided by someone else. The ambiguous terms defined in most of the versions of this law such as "communications devices" are dangerous for end users because they leave so much open for definition and interpretation. They are designed to target end users, so that the creators and proponents of this bill may engage users in direct or indirect legal action. An area where individuals are not well equipped to defend themselves.
These scenarios listed here are just the beginning - the implications of this facet of the law are not limited to just the Music industry or consumers. They apply to communications everywhere.
The simple matter of it is - this law is an "Exploit". The MPAA and RIAA are implementing the law and variations of it in the state legislatures because they are lower profile areas where legislators are less cognoscente of the implications of this bill. As a result this law will/has already grant the RIAA/MPAA the ability to influence those who do not have significant legal clout to do as they would see fit. Though, the MPAA and RIAA are only the most immediate concerns - the broad and general definitions laid out in this law can be used by any entity to deny communications services to an individual or organization. Fred von Lohmann speaks of transferring law enforcement from public to private hands, this is exactly that. Though, law enforcement is the exclusive domain of the Government. This law bypasses our legal system and allows other parties to prosecute under the guise of a "law". The only reason this can happen is that the state legislators have and insufficient understanding of the implications of s