Slashdot Mirror
A Law Show Set 25 Years from Now
aaron240 writes "CBS will be airing a pilot of a new show called 'Century City' tonight, Tuesday, March 16th. CNN has the story. The executive producer, Ed Zuckerman, had this to say about the future state of the law in America: 'Our future is a positive future. We assume that things are basically going to get better, progress will continue,' Zuckerman says. 'There will be problems -- new inventions, new technologies will bring with them difficulties -- but it's a bright future.' He also makes it clear that 'This is not a 'Blade Runner''. Is there any chance it will offer a decent treatment of the issues Open Source advocates worry about today? If he's so positive, could he possibly know anything about software patents to say nothing of SCO?"
This might turn out to be a great show. But really, there's already a glut of legal shows on television (The Practice, Judging Amy, JAG, etc.), and using a gimmick like setting it in the future won't attract me to it.
Is there any chance it will offer a decent treatment of the issues Open Source advocates worry about today? If he's so positive, could he possibly know anything about software patents to say nothing of SCO?
Don't expect it to even come close to issues important to us nerds.
There's just something lacking in a show that focuses on such riveting legal issues as "should a player with a super-accurate bionic eye be allowed to play professional baseball?" Really, this is an actual plot line that will be in "Century City."
Microsoft is currently appealing the latest decision orcing them to break apart...details in the next law show set 25 years ahead of this one.
But I think this will be more along the lines of family law, divorces, and criminal defense rather than copyright law, etc.
Not too many people find copyright law and open source law rulings terribly entertaining.
-------------------------------------------------
Does that sound like something that would discuss issues like software licenses? No, it sounds like a legal soap opera. I don't think this will outlast a season.
They'll STILL be waiting for SCO to tell us which code is in violation.
"Music is everybody's possession. It's only publishers who think that people own it." - John Lennon.
One of the features of the show will be the premiere of the 256th Law and Order spinoff: "Law And Order: Illegal Cloning Investigation Unit".
It's good to use your head, but not as a battering ram.
here's the pilot info:
A young boy's father wants the right to use the boy's genetic embryo clone to develop a baby who could donate a portion of his liver to save him. The firm also takes on the case of a boy band that is suing its lead singer for not adhering to his contract to keep up his physical appearance.
It doesn't look like they are going to tbe dealing with technology very much/not at all.
moreover, it looks like the 2 issues they picked for their pilot are both things that don't require much foresight to envision, not to mention that the clone thing should happen alot sooner then 25 yrs..
I find the timeline a bit aggressive. Supposedly set in 2030, the issues at hand seem more in line for maybe 2070 or beyond. Not to belittle the advances of the last 25 years (all hail the microwave) but twenty five years ago was not that *radically* different from today.
Perhaps the date was chosen to avoid appearing to be "too much like science fiction", but I must express my doubts that LA will have maglev monorails and all cars will be fuel cell powered by then. The death of paper seems even more unlikely, as does robotic kitchens.
Aw, who am I kidding: 1950's scientific optimism plus the moral dilemmas of progress... I may actually watch this just to see if it is ham fisted or actually well thought out.
Sig under construction since 1998.
Why would someone doing a tv show about law in the future really give a damn about the issues with SCO or anything about Open Source. Please people do you really think anyone out in the world but us (ie the slashdot crowd) gives a rat ass about these things?
The sky was the color of a television tuned to a dead channel.
Kay McFadden is a respected TV show reviewer in the Seattle and had this to say, among other things:
"The stories tend to lean on loopholes -- cases and laws post-dating 2004. By any entertainment standards, the writers do a middling job of courtroom preparation and a really bad one with soap-opera histrionics.
At the end of tonight's episode, the verdict is clear: "Century City" is an argument against the kind of research that leads networks to mindless replication. Just say no to cloning."
should a player with a super-accurate bionic eye be allowed to play professional baseball? Should women with breast implants be allowed to compete in wet T-shirt contests?
"Freedom means freedom for everybody" -- Dick Cheney
Can somebody please explain to me what OSS has to do with a futuristic law show? I swear, I expect any day to see a story on something even *more* inane, such as a new color for Pepsi, and somehow, /. is going to relate that to OSS. There really IS more to life than OSS, people! Hell, there's a LOT more to *geek* life than OSS!
While I don't disagree that women should be able to vote anywhere, exactly why do you think that will reduce war? We've had more wars in the US in the past century with women voting than in the century before without.
I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
This is not a 'Blade Runner'
Well done. Blade Runner is well written, original and high quality. This is network sci fi/law drama, respectively the worst written* and the most overused of TV drama settings
*Some of it may be good, but for every Star Trek or Babylon 5 there are 2 Milleniums or Space:Above and Beyonds
Worried you might not keep your virginity forever? Try new Linux(TM), guaranteed twice as effective as LARPing
This is a must read for anybody worried about patent_laws/copyright_laws/DRM/DMCA/etc. It outlines a future scenario where a student can face imprisonment for sharing/borrowing books/software which she could not afford.
There was a time when one would've considered this scenario farfeteched. With the new draconian laws, unfortunately it doesn't seem so anymore. A *must read* for any concerned Slashdotter AND to these folks trying to paint a BRIGHT picture for the current legislative system.
Quotes:
For Dan Halbert, the road to Tycho began in college--when Lissa Lenz asked to borrow his computer. Hers had broken down, and unless she could borrow another, she would fail her midterm project. There was no one she dared ask, except Dan. This put Dan in a dilemma. He had to help her--but if he lent her his computer, she might read his books. Aside from the fact that you could go to prison for many years for letting someone else read your books, the very idea shocked him at first. Like everyone, he had been taught since elementary school that sharing books was nasty and wrong--something that only pirates would do.
---snip--
Later on, Dan would learn there was a time when anyone could go to the library and read journal articles, and even books, without having to pay. There were independent scholars who read thousands of pages without government library grants. But in the 1990s, both commercial and nonprofit journal publishers had begun charging fees for access. By 2047, libraries offering free public access to scholarly literature were a dim memory.
An Indian-American Hindu committed to non-violent thought/speech/action alarmed by the global explosion of radical Islam
Begin Rant
/Rant
Our future is a positive future. We assume that things are basically going to get better, progress will continue,' Zuckerman says. 'There will be problems -- new inventions, new technologies will bring with them difficulties -- but it's a bright future.'
You know one huge improvement in our lives that this show likely won't consider? Erasing every single law on the books every 5-10 years.
Does anyone find it odd that we have to live, for fear of imprisonment, under a set of laws and regulations so conflicting, non-intuitive, and complex, that one needs a 6 year education to begin to understand the law?
Need an example? Look at Martha Stewart, soon to be imprisoned for basically lying to cops about a crime they couldn't prove she did anyway. Over an amount of money that was a fraction of what it probably cost to prosecute her. And she wasn't under oath. I care nothing about Martha Stewart personally, but the scenario stinks to me.
The US Code is hundreds of thousands of pages. Most of it is rot, laws set by legislatures to grant special priveleges to certain constituencies- or a sketchy, contrived delegation of Congress' lawmaking power- The EPA, anyone?- that we could dispense with and make the country a better place. I doubt anyone can go a full year without breaking a good half dozen laws, even with the best intentions.
So many laws and regulations could only come from a body who is deluded into thinking that the cure to any percieved societal ill is even more government. I suppose I can't blame them too much- when the only tool you have is a hammer, everything starts to look like a nail- but it's far past time to clean house.
Oh yeah, another lawyer show- woo-fucking-hoo. No, I did not read the FA.
Oh yeah, vote for me when I'm old enough to be a Senator, so I can try- likely in vain- to fix it. Thank you.
Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms should be the name of a store, not a government agency.
Boy, the writters really had to dig deep fot this idea. Then again, this might just be a way for Hollywood to make everyone think that all the laws that they are buying are really good for the average citizen.
I can see the episode already:
*Two lawyers sitting in a cafe*
Lawyer 1 : Well, looks like they finally broke up that piracy ring
Lawyer 2 : Wow, I would have thought that with all of the consumer protection laws that were passed in the early 2000's that people would have given up trying to steal music.
Lawyer 1: Nope, seems that some people never learn that piracy is bad. After all, its the reason the economy crahsed in 2010.
Lawyer 2: Its a good thing that the Digital Rights Act of 2013 was passed. It was only by allowing the record labels the right to raid homes, and confiscate pirates computers that we managed to end that black time.
Lawyer 1: Yes, and the extension of copyrights to 1000 years was just the right thing to do, afterall, the creators should be allowed to gain the benifits of thier work.
Laywer 2: And don't forget about clearing up the whole problem with analog copies, allowing that to continue could have had seroius side effects.
Lawyer 1: Yes, indeed. If only people had realized earlier that they have no right, or valid reason to make any copy, we might have avoided the whole crash of 2010.
*break for commercial*
Or maybe I'm just being cyical today.
Necessity is the mother of invention.
Laziness is the father.
So I'd say, probably not. Sounds like more far-fetched, yet hackneyed sci-fi cliches inserted into Law&Order.
-3Suns
~~~~
The Revolution will be Slashdotted
From The Globe and Mail:
Just imagine the pitch some scriptwriter must have delivered for the new series Century City (CBS, 9 p.m.): "Sexy lawyers in the future! And they're practising law!" It must have seemed a good idea at the time.
Certainly, the network would like the show to become a breakaway ratings hit (not likely), but more likely, it's airing it because it's already spent the money.
The show is set in a high-end L.A. law firm, circa 2030. The company is managed by a few salty old-schoolers, Hector Elizondo among them, and a few young upstarts, including the necessary young idealist (Welsh actor Ioan Gruffudd), best known from several turns as the lead in C. S. Forester's Horatio Hornblower on A&Eand wildly miscast here.
The first episode veers between two cases customized and contrived to fit the futuristic format: A scientist (David Paymer) is arrested for cloning, although he was doing it only to save his son's life. A septuagenarian rock star (Anthony Zerbe) is sued by his band mates for refusing to undergo procedures to look young.
Sad to report, the future looks pretty much the same as the present does, except with cleaner air and fancier laptops. There are a few advances: Pre-trial hearings are accomplished via holograms. Characters marvel about cherries without pits. But where are the moving sidewalks, the sassy robot maids and other conveniences promised to us by Alvin Toffler and The Jetsons?
Nothing is exceptional about Century City, neither its concept nor its cast, made up largely of vaguely familiar TV faces, which includes a bit player from Suddenly Susan and a woman from Judging Amy. They are actors at a way station -- on the rebound from one show and on their way to the next.
Tuus crepidae innexilis sunt.
Most Obscure Example of Godwin's Law.
Leni Riefenstahl
My amazing wife - Artist, Author, Philosopher - Laurie M
Hell, not even Slashdotters would watch it.
Investigator: OH MY GOD! LINE FIVE IS STOLEN FROM MICRO-FORD-AOL-SOFT-WARNER!
Software Pirate: Oh no. You have found me. I am in trouble.
I mean, honestly, it's difficult to make something like that interesting viewing.
I'll see your cybernetic estoppel and raise you one affidavit of positronic imbalance.
This is way more fun than the tv show is, I bet. Just sitting around making up future law show stuff.
Your Honor, I object! The precedent set in United Posidyne vs General Subatomics clearly establishes that transmissions by tachyon mail cannot be used as an affirmative defense against a charge of q-spectrum barratry!
Objection sustained. The bailiffbot will mindwipe the jury regarding the last piece of evidence, and counsel will approach the hoverbench.
-- Jeff Paulsen
"... and MRAM chips."
(with any luck)
+++ATH0
Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't those enhancements already violations?
A better scenario would be.....when fetal manipulation is practiced, does that make the person who was manipulated/enhanced ineligible for sports? Particularly because it was done TO him/her instead of BY him/her.
Would there be a test for such?
Would there be a seperate division for enhanced athletes? Would the "pure" athletes lose viewership because of that? Could they sue?
And that's just chemical/bio enhancement. They're still thinking too small and focusing on individuals.
Not what we are doing. The progress we have made over the past 25 years is more about many things becoming easier to do or in some cases obsolete. I mean all Tivo is just an automated VCR. You hardly ever put disks or anything into your computer. Using internet banking just saves a trip to the bank or the mail box. It's now very simple to send messages to anyone anywhere in the world for almost free.
In 25 years from now it will be much more of the same. Tax preparation may become a thing of the past because computers have it nailed. Gas stations might be completely automated. Typing things into a computer could be fully optional, (But people still will). People will probably live longer. It will cost even more to live in New York. You get the idea.
I hope that we will have one or maybe even two OMG technologies. (Anti Gravity, Warp Drive, Sentient AI, you get the idea.) But these things tend to only come around once every hundred years. (Fire, Farming, The Wheel, The Gun, The Car, The Light Bulb, The Computer) so it might be asking for a bit much.
Divorce: Kitt from Knight Rider divorces life partner Michael for alimony and a monthly oil change. But who gets the fuzzy dice and the beaded seat cover?
Product Liability: Customer sues when a vegetable becomes mixed into his Soylent Green.
IP: RIAA sues ancient space faring race for IP infringement (Their eons-old anthem bears a striking resembelance to theme of 'Growing Pains'). Aliens carpet bomb Earth.
Technowhiz: Geek invents a lawbot the size of a hearing aid that translates between legalese and english. The firm goes bankrupt -the lawyers into the wilderness for the spin-off "Lawyers in the deadzone"
Murder: Peta activists genetically engineers sentient dog. Dog tells PETA to F-off and insists on his right to eat meat. Activists then kill animal under the defence of 'its just an animal'
Libel: Snake Pliskin hires firm to sue the guy that publicizes his death.
"First you get the Linux, then you get the power, THEN you get the women"
My favorite sci-fi/fantasy series about a law firm is 'Angel'. But it's about an eeeevilllll law firm (is that redundant, or what) called 'Wolfram & Hart'. Apart from that, I'm tired of television's endless stream of doctor / lawyer / cop / reality shows. Probably why I don't watch much TV anymore.
[Insert pithy quote here]
Something along the lines of the robots from Futurama trying to hold legal proceedings. Imagine a tense courtroom full of judgebots, jury bots, shady criminal defense bots, idealistic district attroney bots, a comical oafish bailiff bot. Robot Judge: Before us stands the accused Bender. You stand on trial for five counts of stealing gin from orphans, 3 counts of vehicular petty larceny involving heavy construction equipment and 1 count of jay walking. How do you plea? Bender: Bite my shiny metal a$$ Robot Judge: I sentence you to 100 years gas mining on the sun. Bender: aww crap
Actually this will probably be the only show to deal with today's most important legal issues.
The 'future' setting in television shows is always just a plot device to handle controversial modern issues without getting shot down by the network censors (the 'standards and practices' department).
Television in the USA is always a fine line between pissing off the commercial sponsers and attracting viewers. The material must be 'hot' enough to attact viewers from cable and internet but not to 'hot' to invoke the possiblility that the commercial sponsor will flip out.
However today since the media corporations own so much of the rest of the economy (or, more precisely, the media corporations are owned by giant conglamerates who own large chucks of the economy), it is more important not to piss off anyone in the government.
Television is stupid because there are very few types of progamming that meet those exact requirements, and all the possible plots and scenarios were already developed and aired twenty years ago.
Television would probably have to go off the air anyway by December 2006 without government decree. They simply have run out of things to show.