Slashdot Mirror
Senator Pushes Bill To Limit Anti-Copying Schemes
Brushfireb writes "Republican Sen. Sam Brownback is pushing a bill that will limit the ability of record labels, movie studios and others to use anticopying technology on their products. Most notably, this is important because it states that people will be able to resell their used DVDs, along with putting a concrete limit on this behavior of DRM/anticopying schemes by the RIAA and MPAA."
I tried 5.1-BETA2 on my Thinkpad and it wouldn't even install or run the generic kernel. I guess that's why they call it beta :)
-- I have a private email server in my basement.
RC1 is not released yet. None of the mirrors have had a chance sync up with ftp-master yet.
The release schedule had this release planned for may 30, and the release of 5.1 set for June 5. Is it just me, or is 6 days between first release candidate and final release cutting it a bit fine? I know that 5.1 is not -STABLE (which is why I'm using 4.8, and looking forward to 5.2), but even so...
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
It is official; Netcraft now confirms: *BSD is growing
One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered Windows community when IDC confirmed that *BSD market share has risen yet again, now up to more than 30 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of a recent Netcraft survey which plainly states that *BSD has gained more market share , this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. *BSD is sending other OSes into complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by topping the charts in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.
You don't need to be a Daemon to predict *BSD's future. The hand writing is on the wall: *BSD faces a long and prosperous future. In fact there won't be any future at all for Windows Server because *BSD is growing. Things are looking very good for *BSD. As many of us are already aware, *BSD continues to gain market share. Red ink flows from Redmond like a river of blood.
FreeBSD is the most loved of them all, having gained 93% more core developers. The sudden and pleasant release of the long developed 5.0 only serves to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: FreeBSD is growing.
Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.
OpenBSD leader Theo states that there are 70000 users of OpenBSD. How many users of NetBSD are there? Let's see. The number of OpenBSD versus NetBSD posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 70000/5 = 14000 NetBSD users. BSD/OS posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of NetBSD posts. Therefore there are about 7000 users of BSD/OS. A recent article put FreeBSD at about 80 percent of the *BSD market. Therefore there are (70000+14000+7000)*4 = 364000 FreeBSD users. This is consistent with the number of FreeBSD Usenet posts.
Due to the release of OSX, cool new technologies and so on, FreeBSD is expanding into more desktops than ever. FreeBSD has become more than the sum of its parts.
All major surveys show that *BSD has steadily gained in market share. *BSD is very powerful and its long term survival prospects are very bright. If Windows is to survive at all it will be among OS dilettante dabblers. *BSD continues to improve. The progress achieved is nothing short of a miracle. For all practical purposes, *BSD is alive and kicking.
Fact: *BSD will kick your ass
Wishing does not make it so. But the trouble with Linux drones is that they think the exact opposite.
what version of gcc does FreeBSD 5.1 have that they can still build it for a 386? Even Slackware has moved on to optimizing for 486 now that gcc has broken 386 compatibility....
I don't think that anybody click on my link. And if they did, they didn't ever see the Buffy movie, and they didn't laugh at Pee Wee taking about 23 minutes of screen time to die.
But you know, it makes sense. When that movie came out the average slashdotter was about 2 years old. I guess I'm just an old man.
If tits were wings it'd be flying around.
Where is the frickin stable release. Whatever happened to having a stable 5.0 before creating a 5.1.
Nearly everyone agrees that you won't see a 5.x STABLE until around 5.2. It needs some time to mature before it's deemed STABLE.
All is lost, as GNU/Linux is being sued by SCO!
Simple.
I think of you as the star of a snuff flix.
You make a rotten corpse. Considering how worthless you were alive, death is no improvement for you.
...and still the kernel on alpha does not build... anyone similar experience ?
../../../conf/newvers.sh DRACHENTOR
/usr/src/sys/alpha/compile/DRACHENTOR.
sh
cc -c -O -pipe -mcpu=ev56 -mieee -Wall -Wredundant-decls -Wnested-externs -Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-prototypes -Wpointer-arith -Winline -Wcast-qual -fformat-extensions -std=c99 -nostdinc -I- -I. -I../../.. -I../../../dev -I../../../contrib/dev/acpica -I../../../contrib/ipfilter -D_KERNEL -include opt_global.h -fno-common -mno-fp-regs -ffixed-8 -Wa,-mev6 -ffreestanding -Werror vers.c
linking kernel
init_main.o: In function `proc0_init':
init_main.o(.text+0x3fc): undefined reference to `kse0_sched'
init_main.o(.text+0x400): undefined reference to `ksegrp0_sched'
init_main.o(.text+0x414): undefined reference to `proc0_sched'
init_main.o(.text+0x418): undefined reference to `thread0_sched'
*** Error code 1
Stop in
Do you often post to /. looking for technical help?
If oyu are looking for guidance for how to get FreeBSD support, go to www.freebsd.org
It is official; Netcraft now confirms it: *BSD is dying
One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered *BSD community when IDC confirmed that *BSD market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of a recent Netcraft survey which plainly states that *BSD has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. *BSD is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.
You don't need to be a Kreskin to predict *BSD's future. The hand writing is on the wall: *BSD faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for *BSD because *BSD is dying. Things are looking very bad for *BSD. As many of us are already aware, *BSD continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood.
FreeBSD is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its core developers. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time FreeBSD developers Jordan Hubbard and Mike Smith only serve to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: FreeBSD is dying.
Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.
OpenBSD leader Theo states that there are 7000 users of OpenBSD. How many users of NetBSD are there? Let's see. The number of OpenBSD versus NetBSD posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 NetBSD users. BSD/OS posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of NetBSD posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of BSD/OS. A recent article put FreeBSD at about 80 percent of the *BSD market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 FreeBSD users. This is consistent with the number of FreeBSD Usenet posts.
Due to the troubles of Walnut Creek, abysmal sales and so on, FreeBSD went out of business and was taken over by BSDI who sell another troubled OS. Now BSDI is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.
All major surveys show that *BSD has steadily declined in market share. *BSD is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If *BSD is to survive at all it will be among OS dilettante dabblers. *BSD continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, *BSD is dead.
Fact: *BSD is dying
It is official; Netcraft now confirms it: *BSD is dying
One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered *BSD community when IDC confirmed that *BSD market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of a recent Netcraft survey which plainly states that *BSD has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. *BSD is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.
You don't need to be a Kreskin to predict *BSD's future. The hand writing is on the wall: *BSD faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for *BSD because *BSD is dying. Things are looking very bad for *BSD. As many of us are already aware, *BSD continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood.
FreeBSD is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its core developers. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time FreeBSD developers Jordan Hubbard and Mike Smith only serve to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: FreeBSD is dying.
Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.
OpenBSD leader Theo states that there are 7000 users of OpenBSD. How many users of NetBSD are there? Let's see. The number of OpenBSD versus NetBSD posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 NetBSD users. BSD/OS posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of NetBSD posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of BSD/OS. A recent article put FreeBSD at about 80 percent of the *BSD market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 FreeBSD users. This is consistent with the number of FreeBSD Usenet posts.
Due to the troubles of Walnut Creek, abysmal sales and so on, FreeBSD went out of business and was taken over by BSDI who sell another troubled OS. Now BSDI is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.
All major surveys show that *BSD has steadily declined in market share. *BSD is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If *BSD is to survive at all it will be among OS dilettante dabblers. *BSD continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, *BSD is dead.
Fact: *BSD is dying
It is official; Netcraft now confirms it: *BSD is dying
One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered *BSD community when IDC confirmed that *BSD market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of a recent Netcraft survey which plainly states that *BSD has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. *BSD is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.
You don't need to be a Kreskin to predict *BSD's future. The hand writing is on the wall: *BSD faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for *BSD because *BSD is dying. Things are looking very bad for *BSD. As many of us are already aware, *BSD continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood.
FreeBSD is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its core developers. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time FreeBSD developers Jordan Hubbard and Mike Smith only serve to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: FreeBSD is dying.
Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.
OpenBSD leader Theo states that there are 7000 users of OpenBSD. How many users of NetBSD are there? Let's see. The number of OpenBSD versus NetBSD posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 NetBSD users. BSD/OS posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of NetBSD posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of BSD/OS. A recent article put FreeBSD at about 80 percent of the *BSD market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 FreeBSD users. This is consistent with the number of FreeBSD Usenet posts.
Due to the troubles of Walnut Creek, abysmal sales and so on, FreeBSD went out of business and was taken over by BSDI who sell another troubled OS. Now BSDI is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.
All major surveys show that *BSD has steadily declined in market share. *BSD is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If *BSD is to survive at all it will be among OS dilettante dabblers. *BSD continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, *BSD is dead.
Fact: *BSD is dying
I'd kinda like multiple kernels to choose from during the install. For example if you put freebsd on a laptop, you need to build an "old card" kernel for systems without cardbus controllers. This took me quite a while to figure out.
It is official; Netcraft now confirms it: *BSD is dying
One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered *BSD community when IDC confirmed that *BSD market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of a recent Netcraft survey which plainly states that *BSD has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. *BSD is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.
You don't need to be a Kreskin to predict *BSD's future. The hand writing is on the wall: *BSD faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for *BSD because *BSD is dying. Things are looking very bad for *BSD. As many of us are already aware, *BSD continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood.
FreeBSD is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its core developers. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time FreeBSD developers Jordan Hubbard and Mike Smith only serve to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: FreeBSD is dying.
Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.
OpenBSD leader Theo states that there are 7000 users of OpenBSD. How many users of NetBSD are there? Let's see. The number of OpenBSD versus NetBSD posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 NetBSD users. BSD/OS posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of NetBSD posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of BSD/OS. A recent article put FreeBSD at about 80 percent of the *BSD market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 FreeBSD users. This is consistent with the number of FreeBSD Usenet posts.
Due to the troubles of Walnut Creek, abysmal sales and so on, FreeBSD went out of business and was taken over by BSDI who sell another troubled OS. Now BSDI is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.
All major surveys show that *BSD has steadily declined in market share. *BSD is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If *BSD is to survive at all it will be among OS dilettante dabblers. *BSD continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, *BSD is dead.
Fact: *BSD is dying
A Elected Offical trying to protect consumers as opposed to corp. rights. what a nice idea
What groups are lobbying for this stuff? I can't imagine a politician pushing for stuff like this without someone with money lobbying for it.
After all, these days, politicians care more about compaign money than actually pleasing the people who do the real voting; enough compaign money, it doesn't matter how much of a bastard you are. ~,^
Seriously, tho, who are the backers of this bill?
The same senator is trying to push through a bill demanding that hell freezes over sometime in the near future. Sources say he has much more chance with the second one.
Perhaps with Rep. Rick Boucher's DMCRA bill in the House, maybe our government isn't being as shortsighted as they have been in the past. Maybe the rumblings of consumers (read, voters) will outweigh the cash in the pocket from the **AAs.
Mike
Wow that ALMOST makes me want to switch parties. If only they would do more stuff like this. Someone really needs to put an end to this madness and I have to say I am surprised it was a republican. Not just because they are not my party but because regulating large corperations is not their thing.
"It is not how things are in the world that is mystical, but that it exists." -Ludwig Wittgenstein
Something good coming out of Kansas other than a tasteless wizard of oz joke!
I am in total disbelief. Did they do a DNA check to make sure he isn't a replicant replacement?
True genius is grasping a situation like a peice of fruit, and peircing it just right so that it drains dry.
Unfortunately, our congress has been known to pass bills that sound strong but are actually crippled. I am wondering how this bill will be crippled in conference comittee if passed. Hopefully the EFF's lobby can at least moderate the MPAA/RIAA lobbying machine.
I applaud the congressman for taking such a bold step. I guess it is time for the all of us to get out a pen and write some letters of support. Can everyone please write in support of this? We all know that email is mostly ignored, while they actually have to carry the weight of our letters.
Sig (appended to the end of comments you post, 120 chars)
I think this bill may actually be his more creative way of saying he will not run for another term.
"It is not how things are in the world that is mystical, but that it exists." -Ludwig Wittgenstein
It's about time for the Republicans to wake up and realize that they have so few friends in Hollywood that a scorched-earth policy on the entertainment industry is in order. It would be sweet to see the left coast starved of money.
Vote for the candidate that you think is best, not if they are republican, democrat, or some other party. I am mostly republican myself, but with them backing huge monopolies...
you want recognition for submitting stories, but are too cowardly to whine in your own name>
perhaps there were reasons why your stories were rejected--reasons beyond yours and my conception, as we do not know why some submissions make it and others do not. Hell, they probably don't know either, half the time.
This is extremely good news....
It's also our big chance. Take the time to write a polite letter, encouraging your Senators and Congressman to support this bill. Then print it out, sign it and MAIL it (that's right, snail mail!).
Things are still very early. There's plenty of time for it to die in committee, or be riddled with amendments (some irrelevant, some helpful, some counterproductive). Your job, if you care, is to express your support for this bill-- and those who support it.
If you're from Kansas, you should be especially supportive of Senator Brownback's position in this-- even if you disagree with him on other issues, you should take the time to publicly agree with him on IP reform.
This is a great first step. We need to remember that it isn't the only step, and there's work in here for us to do, too.
I like the idea that I can resell stuff I buy, I like the idea of less DRM, I like the idea of government-mandated warning labels.
However, all of this back-and-forth runs the risk of over-regulation.. so let's just cut to the obvious solution: REPEAL the anti-circumvention garbage in the DMCA. Then companies would be free to sell DVD-copying technology, or stream decryptors, or DRM-busters, or whatever.
You'd be free to watch to your DVD on any player. You'd be free to make backup copies of stuff you were afraid of losing.
Copyright infringement would still be illegal.
At the same time, companies would be able to take advantage of the fact that most people won't bother with cracking the DRM, if the product is *reasonably* priced and access is *reasonably* limited.
Free market principles would apply (anybody remember those? Rather quaint, I know).
Seems like the best possible solution, don't you think???? Rather than piling on law after law.
PS: This story showed up on my RSS reader a few days ago, is it me, or is slashdot way behind the curve these days? Almost every story, I've seen days before..........
...to combat the RIAA? I mean, those guys can do some *heavy* lobbying and one has to wonder if they can rouse the support to stand up to the RIAA gang.
I hope this bill get's back some of the fair use we lost to the DMCA.
Forget DRM, the most important thing in this bill : requiring a judge's authorization to use the DMCA to shut down a website.
In Soviet America the banks rob you!
I love CD-ROMs of 100 minutes (900MB) or more, so, DivX is more beautiful than before, xDDDD.
KaZaAitor
These companies have a right to sell whatever product they want. If they want to make a DRM'd DVD that can only play in a special DVD player that is their right to do so. You do not have the right to force these companies to make the product that you want. You do have a right not to buy it.
Stuart Eichert
It's good to finally see a congress-person supporting what they feel is right rather than the opinion of whoever's giving them the most money.
Though this doesn't mean there won't be copy protection. It just means that if you download copy protected material, the DRM can't prevent you from moving it (copy&delete) to another computer.
There's also Zoe Lofgren's BALANCE act. I tend to be as cynical as the next guy when it comes to my expectations of Congress to watch the interests of consumers, but there are a handful of folks there who seem to get it.
Ultimately, whatever the lobbyists are pumping in, the one thing corporations don't have is the vote, and as consumers at large become aware of what's going on, I bet you will see more Congresspeople under pressure to come around to "our side".
Trouble making decisions? Just flip for it.
More laws to protect consumers from themselves. I'm sorry, if I want to buy a crippled product, I should have that right.
As for requiring labels, that's a bit more reasonable. "This product is rated U for useless."
No, I am not a co-owner or anything, I just have never seen a store like this before, and the owner is truly righteous. They deserve all the praise they get (they are wildly popular amongst cubicle workers in the area).
Senator Brownback surely must be the only one in the government without a yellowback and not accepting greenbacks.
He does make a valid point, though. Often my stories are rejected and then someone else submits the same one.
/. over, so that we all get our news late, after it's too late to do anything.
Maybe it's because the link I sent in (Internet News) was not as credible as his (NYTimes)?
Or maybe it's a conspiracy. The CIA took
Amazing .. Sen Brownback actually introducing something rather than just tow the Republican party line with nary a comment.
.. though it has about a snowballs chance in a warm place of actually getting to the floor for a vote .. or even debated in committie (If I remember correctly, Brownback doesn't have any committie chairs or other bully pulpit to push this from)
Being one of his constituants, I welcome this type of legislation
Hah, what a clever way to extract money from the first-post clique.
Wow, I sent some of those EFF faxes to this guy - you know, the ones that take a minute flat to send - about this topic essentially? Anyway, he sent back letters that he was working on it, you know, the typical political response, I figured that was exactly what it was.
I'm pleasantly surprised I was wrong and will have to call and thank him or something. Kansas roxors.
Yeah, but is he? Is there an IMMINENT, PRESSING NEED for this law? Isn't there just a need for a warning label? I guess what I'm saying is that we should consider whether we should allow the government to just take away the right to copy-protect CD's without an imminent need. I mean, just becuase it can be done doesn't mean it should be done. I, for one, think that the US was not created to take away liberties without societal need, and here there's no need past a warning label to the extent of "this cd can't be copied. don't buy it" or some such. Allowing the government to take away rights just because it's popular is dangerous. See DMCA, Patriot Act. And it's expensive. Consider the small record label that wants to copy-protect its CD's, but can't afford a lawyer to appear before a judge. This isn't fair. There's no reason the government should regulate this beyond a label, the forces of the market should handle this.
Since when has this country used intellectual elite as a pejorative term?
his contributions to legislation
He seems to be quite good, and in many ways opposite certain cenators such as Hollings. (doesn't mean I think hes the greatest at all, but from our evolution-not-required state, certainly beats some states.)
Yeah . . . we generally keep the good stuff here. But we make a few exceptions, like Lynx. . .
[100% ISO 646 Compliant]
SVM, ERGO MONSTRO.
There are scads of issues peripheral to this one. The parts of the law that mandate scrutiny and discussion are great - the parts that dictate specific use of technology, however, are not. This area of technology is far too young to have development stifled by government regulations borne of FUD.
Build a better mousetrap? If you can play it.. you can copy it. Simple as that. There is always a way.. so why bother? There needs to be a shift in attitude towards copyright as a system.. these old laws will continue to fall into irrelvenance as technology improves.
Deography Photoblog
Wait for sending out messages to random Congressfolk until the bill is submitted and has a number. If you contact your Senators or Rep to support a bill without a number, it's not going to reflect well on your position unless you have a relationship with them to begin with or know that they're so into the issue that they might sign on to cosponsor.
Hitting Sen. Brownback's website, there's no mention of this bill at all. My guess is that we're ahead of the curve on this. The work to do now is going to be more along the lines of organizing the effort to work this bill. It's going to take time and commitment (not to mention attention span). If the bill's not submitted yet, selected calls to the right senators can help collect cosponsors. After it's been submitted, it's a good idea to contact the committee staff and committee members of the appropriate committee (especially if they're from your state) to encourage their support in scheduling the bill for a hearing and their vote to report it out of committee. This process is slow and long (review "I'm Just a Bill" from Schoolhouse Rock for a brief reminder).
It is good to contact Congressfolk to tell them what you want them to do. It's very good to be polite, succinct, and thoughtful in your presentation. It's very important to have the right message at the right time -- they get so much mail and email and phone comments every day that asking for their support for something that won't need their attention for months (or years) can seem to them an annoying waste of time.
Contacting Sen. Brownback's staff to thank them for this bill is a very good idea, especially for Kansans. Asking how you could help would also be a good idea.
Take care,
Blain
I'd love to know if theres a petition to sign, a letter I can write, etc, to help with this motion.
What ever happened to the DMCRA bill?
each "frame quasi-copy": [ key 64 bits of quasirandom to decipher data ][ data 4096 bits ciphered ]
R = 4096 / (64+4096) = 0.984% useful space
ItÂs harder to say that each "frame quasi-copy" is copyied from another "frame quasi-copy" in medias.
Please, donÂt patent my idea.
European JCPM (c) (copyright)
I'm from Kansas, and I actually voted for Brownback. He's a great guy...I recently send an email to all the politicans from Kansas regarding the Patriot Act. Brownback was the first one to respond...a few hours after I sent the email. He also followed up with a letter in the mail. I'm not suprised that he is pushing for this legislation.
I have never purchased a stand alone DVD player or a DVD, although I have receive Galaxy Quest as a gift. I have seen nor singed any contract that restricts my right of "first sale". This provision seems to imply that I can't leaglly sell my DVD as the law stands now. Could someone clear this up for me?
European JCPM (c) (copyright)
There are two directions that can be taken in protecting intelectual property.
Copy protection and outragous laws.
The only part of copy protection I have a problem with is when laws require it.
Laws forbiding copy protection are not the opposate. They simply justify more drastic action (the action the *AA's have been taking already).
If you can protect your stuff with out passing new laws or using liccenses to enforce same hay great.
I'd like to be able to play DVDs on my puter and hay all I need is DVD DECSS to do that. Only thing keeping me from it is a stupid law.
Another stupid law won't fix that.
What we need is to eliminate dumb laws not make new ones.
I don't actually exist.
That's ok...Michael gets alot of his information from Junis.
Eh...what can I say. I am just jealous because I don't hear the voices too.
"The DMCA was a carefully crafted compromise and balance struck by Congress." -- RIAA Fool (quote from article)
I spit the yogurt i was eating all over my keyboard when I read that one. It's funny and sad at the same time. Yes, it was a compromise all right. Between the RIAA and MPAA.... very carefully crafted and balanced indeed.
Stupid people make stupid things profitable.
The DMCA is applied as a 400 pound gorilla, or rather, a 4 000 000 pound sterling gorilla: nobody that the DMCA is used againt has the resources to do the legal fight. The DMCRA doesn't help that; you have to use your day in court to demonstrate that your use falls under the DMCRA. The 400 pound gorilla can still intimidate you into giving up.
The Brownback bill allows the FTC to stop technologies before they can be used as a threat, so the DMCRA is never an issue, and the 2600s of the world don't need to spend way too much to assert that they didn't do anything wrong.
Perhaps a compromise: the FTC can declare DRM technologies to be "overreaching". Overreaching DRM may still be sold, but DMCA protections do not apply, only traditional copyright protections. (The provisions of the DMCRA then become redundant.)
This needs some work, but may be an idea.
I support the idea of being able to resell something you have purchased. If you buy a chair, and use it, you should be able to resell it. But to say the makers have to _not_ put copy pretection on their media? That's taking away their rights. Hell, as far as I'm concerned, they can all knock themselves out copy protecting their stuff. As someone pointed out, if it's playable it's copiable, so why bother? The free market will sort the copy-protection issue out. -- Chance
I'm not usualy very political, but I know I'm going to send him a letter to let him know how much I support his point of view. Maybe if we supported these views insted of attacking opposing views we would have more of a say as a slashdot community.
A "quasi-copy" is a derivative work, and in general, preparing derivative works beyond fair use is the exclusive right of a copyright owner.
Will I retire or break 10K?
For bads: quasi-recorders can quasi-burn data with a secret algorithm, and the medias only can be read by quasi-recorders o quasi-players of the same format. The problem is that if quasi-players or quasi-recorders are disappeared or crashed, the medias data are lost.
European JCPM (c) (copyright)
We need to let the market drive the mechanism for backups, resale, time shifting, format shifting, etc. Otherwise, consumers lose because certain companies don't see a profit in making those things convenient. This bill attempts to substitute a government beaurocracy for market forces, which is inefficient and ineffective.
On the other hand, these items are all great:
I wouldn't support this particular bill because it's a band-aid when stiches are needed.
I used to be a narrator for bad mimes. (wright)
Stop yer useless yammering. Go write a letter, or if you are too lazy, join eff.org and submit one of theirs. Show the government the /. effect is not to be messed with, and turn it from the bane of low bandwidth webmasters into a tool for the good of all mankind!
"If the Brownback proposal were enacted, the Federal Trade Commission would have the power to ban DRM systems that limit a consumer's right to resell any 'digital media product'"
Wouldn't this have a large impact on Microsofts' licensing? Think of Windows XP and the protection scheme against puting it on more than one computer. Wouldn't that be illegal then because it essentially is a DRM management tool to prevent sale or transfer of media/license? I'm not educated in the matter to actually know, but it seems that with all the discussion of Palladium, DRM, etc, that this would put a small limit on the madness of pay-per-view/listen/read/etc.
A republican is proposing this?
Copyright is so fundamental that it's clearly provided for in the U.S. Constitution. That document also talks about the reason for copyright. It's NOT to make more money for Disney. It's "To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries". Specifically, in return for the legal protection of copyrights and patents for a limited time, the public is promised that these works will eventually become public property.
This legal concept is being completely perverted in two different ways, and there is an IMMINENT, PRESSING NEED to correct this. The first problem is, of course, that our own lawmakers are giving the special interests longer and longer extensions on these rights. Some have even openly stated an intention to continue to extend copyrights perpetually so that any current copyright would never expire. This needs to be stopped to prevent even further erosion of the constitution. The second is DRM technology. In extreme cases DRM technology can give the publisher so much control that it would be unreasonable to expect a work to ever pass into the public domain. Imagine for example a movie released only to a digital rights managed medium that can not be re-recorded and must be authorized by the publisher for every single viewing (and be confident that work is progressing towards this end). While such a company would enjoy all the protection of copyright laws (even the excesses of the DMCA), they might never pass their protected works on to public ownership, even if copyright extension creep is stopped. Even if they are still around when the copyright expires, there is no provision in the law that would compel them to activity take actions to turn over digital rights keys or other technology that could be needed to avail the public of their eventual ownership of previously protected works.
Look at patents - in this case a patent is granted in return for disclosure on how the invention works. You are not required to patent an invention. You could, for example, make some invention a trade secret, and never disclose it's secrets outside of your organization. In such a case others are free to try to invent it also, but if no one legitimately can duplicate your invention you might well have complete use of it for more than the term of a patent. But if you do want patent protection, you must disclose it so that it will be owned by the public after the patent expires in exchange for your exclusive patent monopoly for the term of the patent. DRM presents the danger that a corporation can get the legal protections of a copyright but also keep private the work as if it were a trade secret. The need to correct this problem is indeed IMMINENT and PRESSING now, before it becomes widespread.
I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
I saw Hollings on C-SPAN on June 2 shortly after the FCC voted to further deregulate media and I wasn't terribly impressed with what he added. I hope he was seriously against the 3-person FCC majority on this because this is one of the most important domestic issues. His stance against the FCC will help redeem my view of him as a legislator.
I thought Rep. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) was a far more powerful speaker because he understood the concept of "framing the debate". Framing the debate means you get to set the limits of allowable discourse--your terminology, your ideas, your way of breaking up an issue become the accepted way to think about the issue and anyone who expresses ideas outside that frame are often unjustly labeled "radical" or "extremist". Sanders hosted a town meeting with FCC commissioner Copps which produced valuable commentary including a discussion on the variety of ways Americans will feel the FCC's June 2 decision locally and nationally. Sanders also stayed late in the House and gave a "special order speech" in which he expressed his desire for the FCC to not allow further homogenization of media. This was on C-SPAN; sadly there were many empty seats behind him.
Digital Citizen
Imagine: The Blu-Ray recorder burns a DVD-media (it secretly violates FCC) that it only can be read by the same Blu-Ray recorder, no other more!.
Nobody can copy-burning the DVD-medias for other players because of no technlogy to do 100% realcopy :( but yes obsolete 50 CD-Roms or 1 portable HD (instead 1 dvd).
KloneLeft JCPM (c) (copyright)
With complex stuff usually most people don't understand or don't care. But when stuff is very clearly popular and simple enough that everyone understands and cares, then the politicians will go for votes rather than just money.
In this case it's pretty straightforward -- you're telling people you're protecting their right to resell their used DVDs. That's something everyone understands and is familiar with. People expect to be able to sell used CDs, used books, and so on, and so saying you're going to protect their right to resell used DVDs is both easily comprehensible and very popular (there certainly aren't many people who don't think it should be lgal to do so).
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
I hate stupid mods, I really do.
They should let you see who modded this.
You fucking moron. God some people are really dumb.
Well this is slashdot after all.
Thank you that was most informative and enjoyable.
I am from and currently reside in Kansas. Several months ago I wrote Senator Brownback a letter requesting such a Bill! The form letter I recieved as a reply didn't make me too enthusiastic, but apparently he has recieved enough requests or he was just morally compelled to create such a bill.
I encourage all of you to write your senators and get this thing passed!
The language is vague at this point, though. The bill hasn't actually been introduced yet.
Either Verizon, as others have mentioned, or perhaps his older children (scroll to the bottom for a family photo).
"Daddy, you and your buddies are making lousy laws. Stop it!" in that whiney teenage voice can be pretty persuasive. "I'll promise to get off the phone more if you do something about it". "Repeal the DMCA or I'll pierce my tongue, and YOU CAN'T STOP ME".
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
I'm against this law. I don't think we should have a bill that limits a company's ability to copy-protect its intellectual property. I also don't think we should have a law restricting a citizen's ability to break that copy-protection (DMCA) either. It ruins the whole sport of it.
Let's be honest. The one thing we all truly respect around here is hacking ability. And that's how this whole game used to (and should still) work. If you were hardcore enough to figure out a way to copy-protect your stuff so that people couldn't easily break it, you deserved to have your IP protected (remember when the first SimCity came out and it shipped with a purple and black page of codes that you couldn't photocopy? Good Stuff!). And if you were enough of a cracking stud to find the tiny, oddly-named file in which X-Wing hid its copy protection (or figured out how to decrypt a DVD), by God you deserved a free copy.
It was a delicate balance, but it worked! We the technologically-gifted were able to either crack stuff on our own or find people on BBS's that could, while the lamers who made fun of us at school kept the IP-producing companies rolling in dough by buying their products at Wal-Mart.
But now they've gone and ruined the game. Where's the fun in not being able to crack stuff, and where's the fun in not being able to wrap your IP in stuff for other people to crack?
This tagline is umop apisdn.
I intend to write this man a simple 'thank you' e-mail. I would encourage other slashdotters to do the same. Most politicians want to be popular. Thank you emails would express that what he's doing is a popular idea (amongst us anyways)
As someone who had his car burglarised last night and his favorite cd's stolen, I am definitely in favor of legislation that allows us to make backup copies of audio cd's. Should've use copies in my car. Dang. :-(
He has my eternal vote. I intend to hand write a thank you letter, I think it would be great support if others did the same. Let people know when their work is doing good.
This Wiki Feeds You TV and Anime - vidwiki.org
Like abortion. Although I am not a woman, I imagine it would really suck to give birth against your will, when there is a simple medical solution. More than not being able to copy a CD for example. So for that alone I would never support a republican candidate, unless s\he explicitely disawowed this part of party platform.
Or social programs. We are a wealthy country right? We will not actually let people starve to death or go without medical care. Or let them sleep without a roof. RIGHT???
Or control of parents over children. Surely a 16 year old shouldn't be spanked for dating a person that his/her parents do not approve. Or forced into a religion, a particular profession, a particular dress code and so on.
Or death penalty. Most murderers kill in the heat of passion, yet so called doctors deliver a lethal injection in cold blood, to a person that doesn't present any threat to society in a high-security single cell.
The way I see it, higher taxes is a small price to pay for less harassment in personal life or help if I somehow screw up. Even Democrats kind of suck, but you can only choose the best option from what's available.
Tomorrow's headline: Bill pushes back
Do what you can to support this. I may not be American, so there's nothing I can do, but what happens in America seems to roll over into the UK eventually. You had DMCA, it's looking like we'll end up with a European equivilent.
Did everyone spot this bit?
Prohibits the Federal Communications Commission from forcing companies that make or sell PCs or digital video products to include specific copy-protection technology in them.
Palladium requires the hardware to only allow trusted OSes to run. I seem to recall Microsoft wanting the government to force processors & motherboard manufactures to have the system built in. This bill would knock that idea on the head.
---Murder, the choice for a new generation
Well, over here the copyright starts to expire when the autor dies. It might expire earlier when you kill the copyright holder.
Has a huge stack of burnt cds in his Lexus. I think he is all about the benjamins. Nobody wants to see the shortage of free things, I know I dont. From an econonomical point of view I can see how these anti-copy schemes would be vital to a companies success what with all the money they give their artists and all.(Cough). But honestly I cant see where we went wrong with who got to be who and whos slaving and whos the slavemaster but we sure need to keep pirating cds, how else will we be free?
I mean really? what else do we get for free but our internet pirating?
No free parking, no free transportation, no free food(except in the grocery store sometimes and I take advantage) so take whatever you can for free!
Hoorah for the congress for doing something positive with all the money they have been getting we should all have free porn by now too, wait..well my hard drive is kind of full!
[cx]
posted as ac to protect my copyright... and my life.
Before all of these "freedom fighters" die in mysterious ways. Right now, it's enough for the companies to buy all the other lawmakers. But you see, greed is liek an infection, gets worse every day. So soon they'll be glad to kill people that are in their way. I'm so glad I'm not an american.
heheh pro choicers are always so dumb
That is the way it is taught to us. However, in reality the Democrats support the interests of lawyers and media conglomerates while the Republicans support the interests of industry. Very few actually fight for the rights of the people that vote for them, and usually only around re-election time.
Rumor has it that it is because there are almost always only 2 contenders likely to win the election and voting for anything else other than a Democrat or a Republican is usually a throw away vote. Both groups are almost wholey owned by the formentioned interests; so, we basically get stuck voting between a pot and a kettle.
Any sufficiently advanced influence is indistinguishable from control.
Copyright is a limited monopoly, both limited in time, and in extent (read: Fair use).
Copy prevention takes away both. Under the excuse of enforcing the rights granted by copyright law, they use it to leverage complete and utter control, something the law was never intended to do.
And the law makers fell for it with the DMCA, essentially granting both eternal copyright, the right to revoke a work out of existance, and to deny all fair use rights.
I, for one, think that the US was not created to take away liberties without societal need
I agree completely. So when you see that corporations have taken away the liberties of the Private Citizen using US law as a puppet, you work to restore those rights. Or did I completely misunderstand your subject line? Corporations have no interest in the public domain nor in fair use, those are your liberties. Protect them indeed.
Kjella
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Republican gets support from geek community.
In other news... Hell freezes over, Bealzibub reports record lows. And monkies flying out of people's butts has reached epidemic proportions... film at 11.
There is no sanctuary. There is no sanctuary. SHUT UP! There is no shut up. There is no shut up.
In theory, every copyright protected book and journal has to be lodged with a designated library in each country. How on earth is it possible that Software does not? The principle of copyright was limited protection in return for disclosure (explicitly including the official library copies).
See my journal, I write things there
Read this...
o ciation/Offices/ALA_Washington/Events10/National_L ibrary_Legislative_Day/brownback.pdf
Permits the FCC to establish a functional requirement preventing unauthorized Internet
retransmission of digital television signals to the public, but only if such a requirement preserves
reasonable and customary consumer, educational institution and library access and use practices. *
Ugh! I guess that would give the FCC power to actually take down bit-torrent links. Realisticly speaking, I guess fair use doesn't include making a copy of Enterprise and letting random strangers download it before local air times. It doesn't mean I have to like it.
But on the other side of things... would this permit Libaries from doing the service instead?
It's actually something I thought about. One issue that concers the entertainment industry is file sharing of telivision programing. Like it or not, comercials pay for programing on comercial telivision. I know I have to tell my self that. And unfortunatly, this is the part I have to grumble at, getting a copy of enterprise online circumvents the comercials.
I've often thought if this really became an issue that I would actually support comercials in downloads in order maintain this service I enjoy. It looks like there are a couple other concepts in this Legislative Alert that I agree with, and that would be a small price to pay.
* http://www.ala.org/Content/NavigationMenu/Our_Ass
There is no sanctuary. There is no sanctuary. SHUT UP! There is no shut up. There is no shut up.
Finally, the voice of reason: someone who understands what copyright is really about.
Copyright is a temporary period of exclusivity granted to authors, in return for a promise eventually to release the work into the public domain. In other words: releasing material into the public domain is the price you pay for having the law protect your exclusivity. As an author, you get a short-term assurance that nobody is going to make money by pretending that your work was actually theirs {which, I am sure, some people are nasty enough to do}. Or at least, if they try, the law will be on your side. As a consumer, you get an assurance that you will - eventually, at any rate - be able to obtain the works you are entitled to {for, as I have stated before; no person is an island, and all the fruits of all human endeavour belong to all humanity} for only a nominal cost.
The compromise is determined by the duration for which exclusivity is provided. It should be long enough to permit authors to make a reasonable amount of money, but short enough to allow consumers reasonable access to material. This is, by definition, a highly subjective matter and I don't believe it improper for government to attempt to define some guidelines as to what is "reasonable".
The corollary of this is: if an author has no intention of ever releasing a work into the public domain, then they have no right to expect anyone - least of all the taxpayer - to assist in the maintenance of their exclusivity. Put it like this; either you make your work available to everybody (sooner or later), or you don't make it available at all. There is nothing in between.
There should also be a requirement for anyone wanting to use technological measures to prevent copying of a copyrighted work, to have an unencumbered copy kept in escrow, in order to ensure that when the time comes for it to be released into the public domain, this actually can be done. Any author who does not wish to comply with this measure, and who does not wish to release their work into the public domain after a fixed, non-extensible {though I would not say it shouldn't be shortenable -- this is analogous to the defence being allowed to appeal against a conviction but the prosecution not being allowed to appeal against an acquittal} term, should be denied the protection of the law; and, if they use technological measures to attempt to prevent people from copying their work, then no action should be taken against those who circumvent such measures {cf. reasonable force -- when polite requests fail, less benign methods may legitimately be employed in pursuit of one's rights}.
But the law should never protect any excess of authority, not even one achieved through the (mis)use of technological copy-restriction measures.
Je fume. Tu fumes. Nous fûmes!
summed this us very well in a Halloween episode with the two aliens running for President:
"Vote for Me, I will kill your menfolk and enslave the women"
"No, vote for Me, I will enslave your women and kill your menfolk"
or something like that.
Yeah, I hope he can get Bill to remove that pesky Windows Activation scheme, it doesn't work anyway.
Money for nothing, pix for free
I wonder if this will have any affect on the standards used on Plasma HD (and other HD's) for copy protecting HD television signals. Many new HDTV's are coming with a mechanism to handle the HDCP (High Definition Copy PRotection) schemes.
SL33ZE - Artificial Intelligence is No Match For Natural Stupidity -
2. The "free market" for DRM consists of cartels--the RIAA, MPAA, BSA, etc. If intrusive DRM is allowed, then that is the only format in which the cartel will make media and software available. The cartel controls 99 44/100% of all media and software made.
3. The "free market" won't be able to work its magic, because of a bigassed barrier to entry known alternately as TCPA, Palladium, and the Next Generation Secure Computing Base. The cartel will hold the signing keys needed to run software on this platform. (Yes, I know they say this is not how it will work, and that the first iteration probably won't be that restrictive. Think "frog boiling.")
CEE5210S The signal SIGHUP was received.
This is a horrible idea. This is the same as them passing the DCMA or giving out stupid patents just on our side this time. Let the market decide what will and won't be used. Every time government gets involved in day to day economic issues things get fouled up. There is a reason "Protecting the people from entertainment companies" isn't an article of the U.S. Constitution.
This is a good idea but what we really need is a "consumers bill of rights". Allowing us the right to use what we purchase. See this site for furthur information on Consumer rights www.digitalconsumer.org
We don't need no stinking sig!
I guess they didn't want it because it was on zdnet! Slashdot snobs.
DOES NOT COMPUTE! Seriously, that really is fucked up.
Simply put, our economy does NOT have a problem with volume. The money is quite obviously here. We have the largest GDP in the world, nearly twice that of Japan, who ranks second. No, that is not the problem. The problem is velocity of exchange -- money isn't moving around enough. People aren't buying, selling, transacting...
Strictly economically speaking, the RIAA, MPAA, and their sympathizers have in the last few years shot themselves in their proverbial feet. If their only provably claim is that they're losing money, but someone actually believes them when they sling the blame elsewhere (like on you and me, for proudly participating in the great experiment called "freedom"), then they will continue to get away with it because their revenues will certainly continue to fall. (I am not speaking of nominal revenues, but of real revenues -- taking inflation and other economic factors into account.)
I, for one, am glad to see that the US government is finally starting to do something about this, even if 9 in 10 Congressmen probably don't understand the economic impact of their actions (kinda makes you wonder why Congress makes all the laws about money).
Kinda makes you trust the system a little more.
This is my digital signature. 10011011001
Katz, a novelist and nonfiction author (A Dog Year; Geeks), here explores the bond between dogs and their owners. Focusing on 12 people-dog relationships in Montclair, N.J., and drawing on current research into attachment theory, interviews with animal workers and psychiatrists, as well as conversations with dog owners, Katz offers nuanced portraits of what happens when humans depend on dogs to satisfy their emotional needs. He contends that high divorce rates, an unstable workplace and the shrinking extended family are some of the reasons that people have come to rely on pets instead of one another during times of crisis. Donna, a divorced woman with terminal cancer, turns to her Welsh corgi for comfort and as an antidote to loneliness. In a darker portrait, Katz tells the story of Jamal, a troubled 14-year old and the owner of a pit bull whom he clearly loves, and yet beats daily. Katz also describes the laudable work of Betty Jean, who devotes her life to rescuing dogs from shelters-but who gives little attention to her grown children or grandchildren. Although Katz, a dog owner himself, appreciates the strong tie between humans and dogs, he fears that many owners use their pets as support during hard times, only to discard them later: Kate's German shepherd, for example, helped her recover from her husband's death, but she gave the dog away when she remarried. In this well-written and thoughtful account, Katz makes a convincing case that dog owners must be more self-aware and responsible when they use their pets as human substitutes.
It's a sad day when consumers have to run to Republicans for protection.
And I'm a Democrat. It's mostly because of his work trying to improve human rights in North Korea. For a glimpse at this see yesterdays Senate hearing on "Life in North Korea" at this URL.: rtsp://video.webcastcenter.com/srs_g2/foreign06050 3.rm
Now if we can only get him to fight for the "breaking the information blockade by dropping radios" idea.
See
http://www.freenorthkorea.net
North Korea can be freed without war.. Lets do it!
If creators feel the need for mechanical protection beyond the terms of copyright, they should not be able to use the legal system in addition to their fair-use-defeating technology.
To a Lisp hacker, XML is S-expressions in drag.
At last, something I can believe!
Try only eating one meal a day for a couple months. Works great for me!
"Or social programs. We are a wealthy country right? We will not actually let people starve to death or go without medical care. Or let them sleep without a roof. RIGHT???"
One of my fellow soldiers in Army Reserves is a manager for a subsidized apartment complex. He told me that the most of residents there are druggies (and not the types that are trying to quit). Now I don't mind helping people who are in bad situation through no fault of their own but I do have problems with subsidizing drug use. If we cut off funding to those fuck ups, we should be able to provide more aid to the truly needy without having to pay higher taxes.
1f u c4n r34d th1s u r34lly n33d t0 g37 l41d
"They should let you see who modded this."
Yes, and they should also let you see who posted AC.
1f u c4n r34d th1s u r34lly n33d t0 g37 l41d
Okay, it's Friday, so I'll bite ... there's nothing new here.
Some background since most on slashdot don't really know much of anything about the American Right. There are two major types of conservatism. The first is derisively called "paleoconservatism" by the groups that dominate rags like the National Review. The other are the "neoconservatives" which make up the majority of the major Republican leaders that are rabidly pro-big business, additional police powers and take their pro-Israel views to the point of treasounous activity.
The conservative movement has for well over 20 years been split along these lines. People like David Frum at the NR have really made this split deeper in recent years. Frum is notorious for his denunciations of the "paleos" because they typically deeply opposed the War in Iraq. Fancy that, traditional conservatives not seeing any legitimate reason to deploy 200-300K US troops, marines, sailors and airmen to a country we had no formal threat of attack from. He and others have been known to agitate for foreign policy that puts the interests of Israel at the same level or higher than the interests of the US. Where I come from, a "paleoconservative" family with libertarian leanings now, that's called low-level treason.
I feel sorry for the Israelis and support their right of self-defense but do not support their armed theft of more Palestinian land, especially that land outside their soverign territory. My principles dictate that the ethics that I demand of my government be universal and thus since I support domestic property rights, I see no reason not to condemn the armed Israeli theft of Palestinian land. So what does that make me in neocon land? An anti-semite because I believe that the interests of Israel are ALWAYS subordinate to US interests in the eyes of a patriot and the US should condemn Israel for siezing land they have no title to. What's worse in the eyes of the neocons? I think that there is no ethical issue for a **law-abiding** Palestinian (not a terrorist supporter) to use any force up to deadly force to stop Israeli soldiers from bulldozing their house down.
The neocons are the "big business is good because big business is great in scope of operations" branch. The paleos tend to be very skeptical of how good big business really is for our country. They don't support left-wing regulations usually, but they rarely come out and rabidly defend big corporations. The paleos on FreeRepublic tend to bash Microsoft right and left and tend to roast Gates for his leftist views. A good number of them even claim to use Linux or MacOS X and Mozilla.
Paleoconservatism and Libertarianism are natural political allies. The paleos have the large organized numbers and the Libertarians have the political groups like the Cato and Reason foundations which are more than capable of opening a full can of whup ass on the neocons in the public debate.
I am a political Libertarian and an economic pluralist. Economically I am both a a Libertarian Capitalist and Libertarian Socialist, I don't see any reason why we can't have for-profit companies coexisting with privately controlled workers' cooperatives. It is from that perspective that I think it's obvious that most paleos, ie the real conservatives, have a reason to support this bill and fight the major content cartels. Unlike the neocons, they tend to not feel the need to redefine freedom nor do they feel the need to keep pushing for a bigger and bigger picture to keep people from noticing the very scary fine print details. Heard about that Left-Right anti-PATRIOT coallition? Chances are the rank-and-file members of the Right there are paleos. Bush has lost the support of most Paleos I've met and talked to, if the democrats run a good person (ie a nice person, not someone like Hitlery Clinton) Bush very well get his ass handed to him in 2004.
Click here or a puppy gets stomped!
He's from Kansas and he is republican.
You think he'll loose?
As a rock-in-roll Physicist once said, No matter where you go, there you are.
Actually, no -- it's the loudmouthed religious right who are anti-abortion and generally Puritanical in their views -- NOT Repubicans in general. Unfortunately, these nuts are the big noises who shape public perceptions and control the party purse strings. Most mainstream Republicans believe abortion is your own damn business, no matter what their *personal* beliefs may be. As Dick Riordan [sp?] put it, "*I* don't believe in it, but whether *you* get one is none of my business." (Which was twisted during the election to imply that he was against ANYONE getting an abortion. BTW, I'm utterly free-choice on the matter myself.)
However, one thing Democrats won't give up is welfare programs as currently implemented -- ie. designed to keep poor people poor. (Where the poor's best income model is to not work at all, rather than even get part-time work and lose their benefits entirely.) Why? Poor people are easily led, just offer 'em a handout and you've got their vote. But you've got to keep them poor to keep their vote. If you let 'em get ahead, they discover that those who do get ahead are taxed to death to support the welfare system, and suddenly they aren't so interested in voting for Democrats anymore.
Hence it's no mystery why poor regions tend to vote heavily Democrat. But if the Democrat economic model is so great, why are those regions still among the poorest in the nation?
Also, historically Democrats have taken away more of our personal freedoms, in the name of control over the masses. There's a rather detailed chart Out There Somewhere, tho I couldn't make it come up on short notice. In general, the Republican view of social controls is "stay the fuck out of my life", contrasted to the Democrat view of "We know what's best for you."
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
I'm also in support of gun control laws that have the same approach: no restrictions on having/carrying a gun, but if you use one to commit a crime, then you get heavier criminal charges. Criminals should be the ones getting criminal charges, not innocents that carry a gun for personal protection, or break copy protection for fair use.
At least mafia-owned pizzarias make excellent pizza. Compare to Bill Gates.
Haha. Funniest comment ever.
My guess is that he's just pissed he couldn't rip his new "Queens of the Stone Age" CD. I know I was!
Arguing that copyright protection vioates the US Code would be a great argument. I suspect that it would fail, though. Unless it's in the Constitution, Congress can do anything it wants. In this case, Congress has allowed copy-protection schemes and enforces their integrity through the DMCA, also part of the US Code. Maybe there's room for an argument that some copyright protection schemes whose integrity is protected by the DMCA also violate the fair use provision - if fair use is indeed in the US Code.
Was the sex consensual? If so, then the woman knowingly participated in an activity specifically designed for purpose of creating a baby.
Or social programs. We are a wealthy country right? We will not actually let people starve to death or go without medical care. Or let them sleep without a roof. RIGHT???
One of my best friends from high school is homeless. I see him every now and then, and I've asked him if he wouldn't rather have an apartment. His answer is that the burden of responsibility he would have to take on (job, etc.) is more than he's willing to pay. I love my friend, but I'll be damned if I think I should have my money confiscated to give him a place to live. He's made his choice, and regardless of how stupid I think it is, he can live with it.
Or control of parents over children. Surely a 16 year old shouldn't be spanked for dating a person that his/her parents do not approve.
Where the hell did that come from? Who thinks that's OK?
Or death penalty. Most murderers kill in the heat of passion, yet so called doctors deliver a lethal injection in cold blood, to a person that doesn't present any threat to society in a high-security single cell.
So, you'd be happy if the death penalty were administered in the heat of passion? You have to come up with a better argument than that.
The way I see it, higher taxes is a small price to pay for less harassment in personal life or help if I somehow screw up.
I understand now. The only people I've ever heard to make comments like that were students or otherwise low-income earners. Guess what? Paying close to 50% of your income to deadbeats who don't want to work sure seems like "harassment in personal life" when you've worked your butt off to handle your own responsibilities.
Grow up, get a job, and post again in 5 years. I'll bet you'll see the world differently once you've experienced it.
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
From the article: However, a representative at the Recording Industry Association of America said the legislation is "weighted down with a variety of bad public policy judgments hostile to all property owners. The DMCA was a carefully crafted compromise and balance struck by Congress. That's why efforts to cherry-pick particular provisions are likely to fail."
Bullshit. The DMCA was a carefully crafted bill written, pushed, and lobbied for by partisan lobbyists bankrolled by the RIAA and MPAA. There was no "compromise" involved.
Fuck them.
Well I for one sent Senator Brownback a nice note.
I may not be one of his constituents, but I figure maybe if he gets enough of a possitive response
he'll know it's in his best interest to keep supporting the little guy, and hopefully some other politicians will get the idea.
You can send him email here:
http://brownback.senate.gov/CMEmailMe.htm
DRM makes massive global thermal nuclear war unnessicary to loose our ability to access media.
I don't want access to media too tight. It needs to be good & loose.
I'm sorry, but I just want freedom, and nothing else.
I want the freedom for people to sell whatever copy-protected media they want; as well as the freedom for people to sell any hardware or software that breaks that copy protection.
I want this fought in the marketplace, not in the courts. If there's any legislation to be written here, it's to make sure that everyone has a chance to market whatever product features they want -- good or bad -- free from interference by greedy lawyers or protectionist laws.
Your naivete also shows in your attitude towards social programs. At the risk of sounding like an old fart (I'm not), the money doesn't grow on trees. It also takes lots of money to hire people to make sure these programs aren't abused.
You also call abortion a "simple medical solution". This is the biggest problem I have with pro-choice people: they really think that it's obvious a baby isn't human until it's born. If you really are "tolerant", you have to understand that many people think a life is a life. Come on- many left-wingers are vegetarians or vegans and they find killing animals distateful. You even says it's cruel to kill convicted murderers. Why the same people would think it's okay to kill a human baby with a beating heart and a brain is beyond me. While I don't think the government should ban abortion, I think it's the wrong thing to do and I'm not afraid to say so.
Life isn't as simple as you think.
Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
Senator Brownback supports legislation the protect our rights to copy DVDs, but at the same time, supports legislation to abolish our rights to copy Humans.
Hey, it's my DNA, if I want to rip it to another fleshpod, that's my right. d00d!
We will all wake up and be thanking the people who were defeating copy protection schemes for the last 20 years.
Without them, original Apple IIs wouldn't run, Amiga games and software would be gone, old Dos programs would cease to be... we would lose almost all of the history of (consumer) computing devices.
We aren't going to notice until some government office loses tons of documents that we can't do without, because nobody backed up the software needed to access it.
The makers of the software? They won't care. Chances are they are gone now, absorbed by some larger company that threw them out.
Look at Sierra. Baseball Pro '98 is arguably the best baseball simulation software in existence. Countless add-ons have been written by people who wanted to get it to do more for them.
It doesn't run in anything higher than Win98, however, and it's buggy. Crashes and gets its files corrupted... the most prominent league had to do a cosmic restart last year because of one of those.
If they were forced to put their code in at the copyright office to have a copyright on the game, then since the original dev house is out of business, we could have just gotten Sierra's permission (they'd give it too -- I called them up to ask if they had old source code or dev docs, they said that if they had them they'd be glad to give them but they didn't have any... nothing was preserved since the game is out of print) -- then we'd have the source code in hand. Might cost a bit of money for them to burn it to a CD for us, but we'd have it.
But we don't. I'm this close to writing a new program, trying to reverse engineer the way the game engine works, because copyright doesn't mean actually preserving the work any more, just ensuring that some jackoff in management gets to collect royalties for 3 years and has the option to sue people for 92 years after that.
The media will be obsolete and unreadable long before the copyright expires. Remember LPs? 8" floppy disks? Betamax? You get the picture...
Twenty years from now, who will care about the crap coming out of the media conglomerates today?
As long as the MPAA and RIAA own congress-critters, copyrights will be retroactively extended beyond the foreseeable end of the universe.
Basically, it boils down to this: They do not pay that much in taxes! To extend a "tax credit" to people that don't pay taxes is just another welfare program; it's not tax reform.
Excellent post... you hit the mark perfectly.
Of course, the rubber meets the road on election day. I'd be interested in seeing just how the slashdot crowd votes overall; my suspicion based on the computer enthusiasts I've met is that they don't actually vote based on these issues. But I could be wrong. A mature, organized effort as you describe would be very refreshing and surprisingly effective.
I sent a Letter to Sam Brownback last year complaining about the RIAA/MPAA, Fair use violations, DMCA abuse, etc...
At the time I thought "probably a waste of time". But I did get a signed letter back that seemed to be generally supportive of my concerns.
I am glad I wrote now, I don't feel like I wasted my time.
I am not delusional enough to think this is a direct cause and effect occurance, but nice to see positive results none the less.
My old sig was REALLY stoopid.
Why are anti-death penalty people so often pro-abortion? I am against abortion, against the death penalty, and often a Republican.
By the taping of my glasses, something geeky this way passes
Just realized something.
One of the profiles that customs applies to determine who most likely to be a smuggler will also work to figure out who's most likely to vote.
Theoretically, someone who hasn't got a tight regular schedule (ie. no steady job, drug dealers, criminals, the elderly, teens). So they've got lots of time on their hands. Nothing to interfere with them smuggling stuff across the border (or going to the voting booth).
---------------------
For trivia's sake, the other one we used a lot was racial vehicle profiling. Official stance is that racial profiling isn't sanctioned, but officers that don't do this tend to get reprimanded and creatively suspended. Anyways, it goes something like this:
Non-caucasians driving 3rd party vehicles (someone else's car - a rental or a borrowed car)
or
Non-caucasians driving vehicles that don't match their economic profile. ie. Non-whites shouldn't be driving nice cars.
Agent Smith (really)
Canada Customs and Revenue Agency
the mpaa is right
Somebody let me know when this passes so I can get my pig poop unbrella ready.
No, it boiled down to the choice was either between that, or reduce the capital gains tax cut some more. Guess which way the Republican majority voted?
And the people making 26k _do_ pay that much, it's a tax credit, i'm pretty sure that means money back on taxes they already paid. Even the original bill didn't extend the tax credit to people making less than 10k, because those people weren't paying tax in the first place, so your claim is completly unmerited.
This Space Intentionally Left Blank
Terrorists are a tiny minority but the Israelis strenghthen their hand by the way they treat Palestinians.. Their goal is basically to force them to leave..ethnic cleansing.. They have admitted this..many times.. And they have killed 4 times as many Palestinians than Palestinians have killed Israelis.. mostly civilians..children, etc.. There is no moral high ground..
Ethnic cleansing (moving people off of their land in order to replace them with another ethnic group) is illegal under international law.
Apartheid didnt fly in South Africa and it wont fly in the Middle East. That is why I suggest that any Israelis reading be nice to the Palestinians or it will come back to haunt you later. Why are they so greedy? There is enough land for both groups.. But Israel seems to want it all..
"Do onto others what you would have them do unto you" Thats the golden rule..
For some background on what is basically the big land grab see this URL - Check out the map - it speaks for itself.. You may wonder why you never saw this map before.. well, there's a reason. The US media doesnt want people to see this very basic fundamental information.. Why?
The Palestinian land is broken up into hundreds of non-contiguous little plots..with Israel holding the high ground, the aquifers, the roads, almost everything of value.. See the map at the URL below.. http://www.btselem.org/English/Publications/Summar ies/Land_Grab_Map.asp
Peace!
Re: sex, pregnancy and abortion. I argue that the specific purpose of sex is entertainment not attemped conception. Pregnancy is a side affect of sex and in my opinion a nasty, preventable one. Abortion is a crappy form of birth control, but it is the only one that is 100% effective. For those with religous and/or moral objections to abortion -- tough titties, you don't get to force your religious beliefs into other peoples minds.
;)
Re: welfare and right to sutenance level support. This one's thornier. No one likes seeing their money, i.e. personal power, get squandered by the government. I don't argue that. I argue that it is not a waste of money to feed, clothe, medicate, educate and house the humans that can not or even will not help themselves. Healthy people with full bellies, confortable clothes, shelter from the world and something to occupy their minds are less of a problem than dirty, hungry, diseased, homeless people.
How about this idea: institutionalize the homeless in facilities that provide food, medical care, shelter, education, clothes and release them once they a) can pass some sort of minimal "how to function in american society test" which would subsume GED equivilancy, b) are detoxed (if needed) d) have a job lined up, e) have housing lined up. Granted this is a bit fascist, but all it really is is a govenment subsidied equivilant of a good homeless shelter.
Re: children's rights and corporal punishment. This one's real ugly due to the many shades of grey in the opinion differences between parent and child. However, if my mom or dad hit me when I was 16, I would hit them back. I will not accept physical abuse from anyone, even my parents.
Re: The death penalty. I have one argument that trumps all others. The death penalty should not be used because there is no UNDO button on it! Sometimes the wrong person is convicted of a crime. If someone commits some henious crime, life without the possibility of parole will protect society and if future evidence proves the person did not commit the crime, he can be freed.
Re: changing my mind when I get into "the real world": I have been working and self supporting for years and have had this viewpoint for years. I still maintain these viewpoints due to a) compassion for humanity, b) enlightened self interest. So which are you a) a selfish, b) uninformed.
Personally, I'm waiting for 5.x-STABLE before I completely switch over from Linux to FreeBSD.
:)
:P
Why am I doing it? Not because of any zealot reasons, I don't have any horrible Linux horror stories, and no, it has nothing to do with SCO.
The truth, the honest truth, is that I just like the way FreeBSD does shit better, and hey, I've been using FreeBSD 4.8 a lot more than Linux or Windows anyway (a lot more) so it makes a lot of sense that I should start seriously concidering which of the two I should use as my *nix solution.
I started experimenting with FreeBSD back with 4.7, and then when I re'formatted' I decided to ditch the BSD partition in favour of Linux, there were some issues I had with BSD, both the system itself, and my lack of knownledge with it, that prevented me with feeling comfortable as using it 'full time', if you will.
I regretted ditching 4.7 later though, I dunno why, I just... missed it. It was fucked up and just plain weird, but oh well, 4.8 gave me a great excuse to put it back on my system, and I'm loving it.
Anyway, the main reason I'm looking forward to changing over completely with 5.x-STABLE is that it has DevFS, which is something else that I love; it's also the one thing that I like and use a lot that FreeBSD doesn't seem to have yet. Well, I guess it does now, anyway, so I'm happy.
I wish FreeBSD would adopt a more portage (www.gentoo.org) like approach to the ports system, while I have no complaints with the ports system as it stands, added functionality could only benefit the masses.
And, as for the *BSD is dying trolls, uh, don't mean to burst your bubble, but you're dying as well, I mean, technically we're all dying, but hey, if you want to waste what little you have of your life knocking an OS, then I'd have to say that it's a horrible way to go, but whatever, to each their own.
Now I'm going to shut up and hit the submit button.
-If God wanted people to be better than me, he would have made them that way.
...is now hereby nominated for that rareist of the elite, that hardest to find....
A Republican with a BRAIN!
[laughing] Man, that is so true. It's amazing how easy it is to be sociali^H^H^H^H^H idealistic when you don't [yet] have anything to lose.
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
Interesting...
You're completely right, of course. People with regular jobs often can't find the time to vote. A good way to help encourage to participation would be to hold elections on the week-end, hold them a full 24 hours (everybody gets some time off, right). Better yet, just make election day a national holiday.
http://yetanotherpoliticalrant.blogspot.com
Well, with 5 cats (all boys, the "bachelor pad" ;-)), all I can say is... I sleep with more "pussy" on a nightly basis than any guy I know :-)
;-) Until then, I have my "kids".
Based on my 2-year average between real human female relationships, maybe it'll happen soon
The record is clear on one thing: no operating system has ever come back from the grave. Efforts to resuscitate *BSD are one step away from spiritualists wishing to communicate with the dead. As the situation grows more desperate for the adherents of this doomed OS, the sorrow takes hold. An unremitting gloom hangs like a death shroud over a once hopeful *BSD community. The hope is gone; a mournful nostalgia has settled in. Now is the end time for *BSD.
All I can say is wow! I'm from Kansas and have written (with the help of the EFF and others) lots of emails to him regarding this issue. Maybe they made a difference, maybe not, but in either case you can guess who I'll be voting for come election time :-)