Slashdot Mirror
EFF Suing The FCC Over Broadcast Flag
Tamor writes "According to this press release the EFF with 'five library associations, Public Knowledge, the Consumer Federation of America, and the Consumers Union' is suing the FCC over its decision to mandate the broadcast flag." Reader MImeKillEr explains "The lawsuit is charging that the FCC exceeded its jurisdiction, acted in an arbitrary and capricious manner, and failed to point to substantial evidence in adopting a broadcast flag mandate. The FCC has asked the court to put the lawsuit on hold, pending the FCC's decision on petitions to reconsider the broadcast flag mandate, although all of the petitions address unrelated matters. The coalition of organizations opposed in court the FCC's attempt to postpone the lawsuit."
As I understand it, any peice of hardware that doesn't recognize the broadcast flag will receive a down-res'ed signal. I am sure this will make for a market in line filters that you place between the source and the recorder that tells the source that the recorder supports the broadcast flag... and then come the FBI raids.
Lord, bless my users that they may stop being such fucking idiots!!
A little background:
The motion picture and television industries know that digital broadcast is coming. They want to be able to play their content (movies and TV shows) over these digital channels. They are afraid that persons uknown will record the content in perfect digital clarity, and redistribute it overseas, for free or for profit. Overseas syndication is a big profit center for these guys; they don't want to give it up without a fight.
If the broadcast flag fails, these industries just won't introduce content to digital broadcast. Movies will be available strictly by satellite or by digital cable (which already have protection built in). Original broadcast televions shows (which already have something like a 1 in 20 success rate) will just never appear on broadcast digital TV. In fact, broadcast digital TV might completely fail as a widespread technology (like AM stereo) for lack of content and because of low consumer adoption.
The FCC sees its jobs as making that kind of widespread adoption possible, easy, and necessary. That's why the FCC adopted the broadcast flag. They think it's the only way that enough content will come to broadcast digital for the medium to have any chance of success.
What we are left to ponder is this: Is broadcast digital televison so important that we are willing to accept these kind of use restrictions from the industry? Whatever you decide, be sure to let the FCC know.
Sometimes I worry that I'll develop Alzheimer's disease, but no one will notice.
There are other reasons to get HDTVs...you can upsample DVDs and regular broadcasts and recieve a picture that is much more pleasing to watch...
I guess you've never heard of Anton Pillar orders.
Someone goes to a judge and says he's a copyright holder and he aledges that you are infringing his copyright and that you have infringing materials in your house. He then generally says that there is a danger that you will destroy that evidence if it is not obtained immediately. The judge then grants an Anton Pillar order and the copyright holder's hired-thugs pound on your door and search your house and seize your property. A copyright holder may go from filing an allegation in court to seizing your property in matter of hours (time is critical because you might destroy the evidence, remember?). The first you hear of it is when the rent-a-thugs pound on your door with the order.
They aren't cops and it's not a "warrant", but it is an "order". You pull out a shotgun and you'll probably wind up in prison.
As far as I know the US doesn't have them yet, but the copyright industry is pushing hard to get the most absurd laws from each country passed in every country. They generally use Free-Trade agreements to force legislators into passing the laws they want. Usually it's exporting the DMCA to the rest of the world, but they are getting Anton Pillar-type language slippled into treaties to import it to the US. Take a look at the US-Australia treaty that's been nearly finalized.
The existing TRIPS treaty looks like it just about requires Anton Pillar orders already. It requires courts to have the power to issue inaudita altera parte orders - meaning copyright holders can have a court issue orders against you without you being in court to respond, or even informing you that they are going to court against you. Requirements for evidence to be expeditiously turned over and preserved (seized) to prevent destruction. And rather amusingly Article 47 revokes your right to remain silent. Note that when I say it "amusingly" revokes your right to remain silent I mean a perverse and sickening sort of "amusement".
Someone shoulg go check the vault in the National Achives building. I think our Constituion just spontaneously combusted.
-
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.