Slashdot Mirror
Update on State "Communications Services" Laws
babbage_ct writes "As has been reported on Slashdot before (see here, here, and here for just a few) the MPAA is pushing so-called Super-DMCA laws in states around the country. Well, score one for the good guys. Oregon's version, SB 655 is going to die. Turns out the sponsor was scammed by MPAA lobbyist. See the e-mail from legislative staff below.
From: "Staff SenCharlesStarr"
To:
Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2003 5:17 PM
Subject: Status of SB 655
Status of SB 655:
SB 655 is slated to die in committee this session. It is no longer an immediate threat, however, there will be a study commission appointed over the interim. Sen. Minnis decided that the issue was too complex to resolve this session. I will attempt to inform you when the commission is formed so that you can have further input. Oregon truly dodged the bullet on this. Some states passed the MPAA model legislation before the IT community even knew it existed.
The email you sent to Sen. Starr (and I hope all of the committee members) helped to stop this dangerous legislation. Good job! In case you're wondering why Sen. Starr sponsored this bill in the first place, it was requested by the MPAA lobbyist (who really is a nice guy) but Sen. Starr was told that it was a simple bill to update copyright law in relation to digital media. Yes, and a whole lot more! As the full impact of the bill became clear, Sen. Starr withdrew his support, which contributed to the bill's "unfortunate demise."
If you have any further questions, please feel free to ask.
Ken McDermott
Legislative Assistant
Senator Charles Starr
900 Court St NE S-312
Salem, OR 97301
staff.sencharlesstarr@state.or.us
Wow, a governor with a brain. I'm moving to Colorado. Think they'll let me bring my guns?
"The evil of the world is made possible by nothing but the sanction you give it." -- Ayn Rand
nt.
Useless sig.
There maybe really is some hope... We should thank all of the people who are constantly helping in this fight for freedom. They don't have money and power, like the pro-DMCA people do, but they are on the right side. Thank you! It is a good time to donate money to EFF, without which, we could already forget about on-line freedom.
Karma: Positive (probably because of superiour intellect)
First DMCA, then Super-DMCA? Soon we'll have Hyper-DMCA, Ultra-DMCA, Mega-DMCA, and eventually Mega-DMCAx2 which gives full ownership of our computers to the entertainment industry.
Thanks to all those who helped prevent this law
from happening.
however, this will most likely lead to more subversive tactics (like the mass IM'ing they pulled recently) by the MPAA and RIAA...what they don't seem to realize is that they don't have a chance technology-wise against those that wish to share files. Of course, if they pull anything as sneaky and underhanded as actually attempting to delete files from user's system, that will be their final mistake, because they will surely feel the wrath of the enraged consumer then.
the MPAA lobbyist (who really is a nice guy) Yeah so is the car salesman that's got this sweet deal on a '76 Lincoln, driven by a little old lady on Sundays.
-- Some days you're the dog; some days you're the hydrant.
> members) helped to stop this dangerous legislation. Good job!
Wow! I guess maybe one guy writing his congressman can make a difference! I'm glad that there are some sponsors of bills like this who don't supporting super-DMCA-type bills because they're eeeeeeeeevil, but because they simply don't recognize the consequences of their legislation and are willing to change when they realize what they're actually sponsoring. I'm also glad this senator apparently had a legislative aid with some sense to oppose the bill!
It's called a joke, idiot...that's why it's in quotes. Ken McDermott is implying that the bill's demise is not truly "unfortunate".
The lobbyists WILL be back next year, and the year after, and they'll keep telling bigger lies, and offering bigger bribes, until either they get their way, or the industries which fund them shrivel up. Or, perhaps, until we make such a big noise that the politicians decide that this is an untouchable issue.
Remember: the lobbyists only have to win ONCE in each state. We only have to get careless or complacent ONCE to let them win. This was good news, but the battle isn't nearly over yet.
We need to keep educating the unwashed masses, need to keep letter-writing campaigns going, and generally need to keep following up. We also need to volunteer in the re-election campaigns of the clueful few who are on the right side here. And tell other candidates why we chose to volunteer for Mr. Clueful instead of Mr. Other.
Those bribes from the lobbyists are only valuable to the legislators if they believe that the bribe can buy more votes than the legislation will cost them. When a lobbyist walks into a legislator's office and says: ``I'd like to talk to you about strengthening copyright ...'', the legislator needs to be able to point to a pile of letters on his desk and say: `` These letters are from voters who are on the other side, and I get a big stack like that every day. I'd like to help, but I can't afford to. Why, I'd loose half my campaign workers if I even listened to you!''
See what I've been reading.
Because the purpose of posting responses to articles is to foster meaningful discussion about the topic at hand. Since your post simply states that you do not find the subject matter 'interesting' enough to adequately comment on, it is extraneous and has been modded as such, much like this comment is fated. Don't take it personally.
politics effect your life, now and in the future.
To not get involved is akin to not monitoring your servers and hoping all will always be fine. Then when it isn't fine, you just complain.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Now if they public could only realize why they would benefit from undoing the last several copyright extensions as well.
And that legislative assistant may have called the MPAA lobbiest a nice guy, but I don't agree. He obviously lied about the bill to get it introduced. I'd never let that guy in my office again!
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
Gov Owens has banked his popularity on the Colorado economy which is heavily dependant on the 'New' economy of IT,internet, prog etc. Owens has touted that he is resonsible for making Colorado a prominent player in this economy. Very much so in the last election.
Well the economy sucks here, many people have been laid off, no new jobs, just like most places. He had to do this or he'd be out of a job too.
Basically the point is, if you don't like the article don't read it, and certainly don't post your disapproval of it. I found the article interesting, you didn't. Guess what? Opinions differ. You aren't the embodiment of geekdom and neither am I. It's also "meaningful discussion" in that it is a victory for the geek scoiety in general, and thus is very relevant to "news for nerds". And why does the SCO post autmatically deserve more posts than a new programming language? Some of us actually have to program for a living and we can't always choose what to program in. It's nice to have somewhere to see emerging technologies, even if they are from MS. Your post that because SCO's post had less comments than F# post, it must not be meaningful discussion makes no sense in any way, shape, or form. Number of posts != quality of discussion. Are 400 -1: Troll posts more meaningful than 50 +5: Informative posts? I think not.
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. It's just that yours is stupid.
Did he not read the bill before he supported it? WTF! He shouldn't be re-elected.
As bills like this are sponcered by our publicly elected officals - I can't help but think that "we the people" do not have any input as to what is acutally happening with the whole DRM/MPAA/RIAA non-sense.
The majority of Americans who's stock and trade crosses paths with the DMCA appear to be strongly against it - yet corporations still wine/dine/donate to these politations that we apparently elected to push such pro-police state laws.
Would it be fair to say that are elected officals only agenda is to do whatever the mega-corporation of the week has to say should be law?
Are there actually elected officals who are are looking out for the common person's liberties, and such? If so, why are there not more of them?
The people have spoken, we do not want a revamped DMCA - as we didn't even want the original DMCA... Yet the original DMCA passed??? That doesn't sound very democratic to me.
A return to Classic DMCA for the old timers.
"We make our world significant by the courage of our questions and by the depth of our answers." Carl Sagan
This was new news when I submitted it a few days ago, along with a pointer to a Rocky Mountain News editorial that may have contributed. It's old now. ;)
My blog: http://www.seebs.net/log/ --- My iPhone/iPad app: http://www.seebs.net/seebsfrac/
The real story here seems to be that VETO power had to be used. The story doesn't say a lot, but that implies that the government there came very close to passing this. While the governor may be a good guy it still doesn't say a lot for the state.
What would it take to start going on the offensive instead of the defensive, here? Can't special interests groups like the EFF lobby for the creation of laws protecting our rights to fair use, backups, reverse engineering, etc. so that *we* only have to win once?
I do understand we can't compete monetarily, but letting the general public know and understand these issues (instead of preaching to the choir and only publishing these types of things on a site dedicated to "news for nerds") could offset the problem. After all, I guess the only thing that can compete with campaign contributions is the actual swaying of public opinions at times of elections and, due to MPAA/RIAA/Blah propaganda, we are the minority.
I do understand that I'm probably being really naive here, not being a guy that keeps up with/understands politics well. Maybe someone who does can explain the problem and make a few useful suggestions to overcome it.
Warning: Opinions known to be heavily biased.
They like monkey-business as much as the next politician, generally speaking, but at least they regard the individual consitituent as something powerful enough to listen to...
Together, we will drive the rats from the tundra.
Again, as someone who works for the gov't, I can attest that those orange construction barrels are a significant part of our residency, and as they form a majority of voters, generally get their way around here.
Notice the poor condition of Michigan roads; these conditions are a result of the barrels voting down on proper roadway budgets, increasing the need for repeated cheap repairs, which the barrels enjoy for leisurely activities.
The second largest voting majority would be the telecom representatives, who tend to be more vocal than orange construction barrels, if not as useful.
The take-home was that just typing up a short opinion and mailing it to your rep's office has a tremendous effect on the political process.
Our intelligent designer has never created an animal that we couldn't improve by strapping a bomb to it.
As soon as I read the Legislative Assistant's e-mail, I sent a message to Senator Charles Starr thanking him for supporting citizen's rights over corporate interests. I also encouraged him to maintain that stance and to urge his colleagues to do likewise in the future.
Fellow Oregonians can follow my lead at the state legislature's home page. I've realized that I should have had that link bookmarked for years.
"It's an erotic, spectacular scene that captures the thrusting, violent, vibrant world Bohemian spirit..."
The TABOR amendment (thankfully) prevents Colorado from raising taxes as a way to continue spending when revenues won't support it. The state constitution prohibits running the state in a deficit. A lot of things, including your apparent sacred cow, have been cut - that's life in a down economy.
Fuck that, they won't let you in without them.
Which proves you never lived there. The whole place is full of tree-hugging greens, relocated hippies, singers, and movie stars that vehemently oppose guns for anyone and oppose the death penalty for everyone except NRA members.
Well speaking as a current CO resident I can tell you that most counties in CO have conceal and carry laws (Larimer County, and Weld County for sure and I know I could find others if necessary) and about the loosest form of gun control remotely possible. About the only liberal tree hugging area of the state is Boulder, the rest of CO is staunchly conservative which would be obvoius to anywone willing to look at the voting records in CO for the last 10 years.
So I am going to have to assume that either you haven't been to the state in years or that you are just trolling.
Double Dipping - A poster getting +5 mods for a post AND a reply to his own post. Usually due to self-correction, addition of extra information, or clueless moderation to the parent post. Interestingly, it appears to happen more often to sincere posters than trolls.
Politicians live by focus groups, so send this guy some email and maybe a few others will do the right thing. It sure as hell can't hurt.
.sig is gonna look REAL funny on this one.
Email Gov. Owens!
Heh. My
ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
Dear Mr. Kirksey:
3 /0 4/31892579.shtml?Element_ID=31892579
Thank you for weighing in on SB 213. I began studying it over the weekend
and have also referred to information available from the Electronic Frontier
Foundation. I must admit that this is an area with which I have little
familiarity, but the legislation could be problematic for the reasons you
address. I appreciate your taking the time to assist by bringing this to my
attention.
Please stay in touch.
Sincerely,
Mark Norris
Senator
-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Kirksey
Sent: Monday, April 21, 2003 8:04 PM
To: sen.mark.norris@legislature.state.tn.us
Subject: SB 213
Sir,
As one of you constituates, I wish to state my opposition to Tennessee
Senate Bill 213. The bill has some valid points, but the flaws outweigh the
possible good.
The bill is too broad and gives too much power to communications providers.
If taken to extremes, VCRs, network routers and other useful (you could say
essential) devices could be outlawed.
As an attorney, please take a few minutes to read through the bill and
imagine possible scenarios where the bill could be abused.
Thank you for your time.
Thomas Kirksey
and later:
http://www.tennessean.com/government/archives/0
Senator Norris wanted you to see today's coverage of yesterday's Senate Judiciary Committee's hearing. Thanks, in part, to your input, he had more questions to ask the sponsor than they could answer, and the bill will be taken up again in two weeks. Senator Norris shares concerns about the extent to which this proposal may infringe upon certain fundamental rights, including Due Process and Free Speech, and he will continue to work on it. He thanks you for your input and support.
I would think that deliberately misleading a legislator about the purpose of proposed legislation would disqualify a person from real niceness. Just my fringe opinion, I guess.
mt
I can move back to Colorado now without being arrested for running a firewall! I think I'll do that soon, actually...
I have no tag line