Slashdot Mirror
Boucher's Anti-DMCA Bill Gets High Profile Allies
Landaras writes "News.com is reporting that a newly-formed alliance called the Personal Technology Freedom Coalition is throwing their support and lobbying efforts behind Rep. Rick Boucher's (D-Va) Digital Media Consumers' Rights Act.
Members of the Personal Technology Freedom Coalition include Intel, Sun Microsystems, Verizon, SBC, Qwest, Gateway and BellSouth. The EFF and the American Library Association are also in support."
Could someone tell me the actual chances of this being passed?
Etiquette is etiquette. He kills his mother but he can't wear grey trousers.
It's time we started providing financial support for the elected officals who do the right thing. Rep. Boucher's contribution page is here.
By supporting him (and explaining why), we reinforce his commitment to protecting our copyright rights, and show his peers that there is a group of people (voters) who care enough about the issue to contribute.
'I ain't a liar, baby, and I ain't proud I just want what I'm not allowed.' -- Violent Femmes, 36-24-36
Assuming that slashdotters would like to add their support in a mail-in campaign, to whom should we send our letters? Would it be best to send it to the Personal Technology Freedom Consortium, to Boucher directly, or to our own senators and representatives?
What do other slashdotters think would be the most effective action?
You may treat all information submitted above as wild speculation.
So the question is: who has deeper pockets?
The state of American politics is at an all time low - votes are now strictly gathered by the $, either in congress or by the voting public.
The kicker? Politicians can voters on their side by taking high-profile polarizing issues (like abortion), but then vote on all other issues based upon the pocketbook of the lobbys. The DCMA and "Patriot Act" are two clear examples.
I would have never have said this before, but I'll say it now: next time, I vote for the ACLU.
Well it seems like it is about time a bill would come along to solve the horrific problems created by that vile devil known as the DMCA. Now what we all need to do is write your senators and representatives. Let them know how much we want this bill to get through and how important it is to us.
If your elected officials are up for election this year iterate how important this issue is and a vote on this issue could sway your voting. The politicians are supposed to listen to their voters and we as voters need to let them know what we want. This bill and an election year may help give us more leverage when writing to our reps and senators.
"Some days you just can't get rid of a bomb."
Thats one of the nice things about Rick Boucher... I spoke with him before he was first elected, and he came across then, as he does now, as a politician who really is working in the interests of those he represents.
Mr Boucher is a very smart guy, and is usually very up to date on technology, and, as has been stated and shown here on more than one occasion, actually has a clue when it comes to technology and law.
I wish I still lived in VA so I could vote for him again. But either way, he is a nice guy who really does give a shit about the common person.
"Our funds have never taken part in toxic or death spiral convertible financings of any sort" -BayStar's managing partne
Instead of debating whether this would pass or what hurdles it will have to clear to pass, can we talk about what I can do to help these guys?
And yes, we can be cynical and weep all we want about how money wins in the end, but how many of us did a darn thing about it?? If someone wants to put together an Anti-DMCA rally in D.C, heck, I will be with you shoulder to shoulder..
Lets not whine about how we are defenseless against the MPAA lobby's millions, lets talk about how we plan to kick their ass!
This is similar to my argument about outsourcing.. When news break out that another firm has outsourced to India/Vietnam/China/Russia, there is a sudden outpour of anger and indignation, but once the last post is written, no one seems to care.. What we need is a permanent revolution (yes I am well aware of who said that!)..
Rapid Nirvana
I think it smells of trying to get the genie back into the bottle. Right now the Microsoft/MPAA/RIAA axis is trying their damnedest to create a culture that is entirely controlled by the media corporations. I'm glad that this bill has the backing of some serious technology players. If DRM isn't controlled in the next few years, it could spin wildly out of control.
No it doesnt.... this is something that Rep. Boucher has been working on for quite some time, and its been mentioned on slashdot quite a bit as well here, here, here, and here.
and that was just the top four in a search of old stories by score...
And you are correct, at least, in that this is a bold move, and definitely in the right direction. It is indeed a folly to think that media lobbies will just ignore this, which is why we ALL need to come together and slashdot congress both via email and snail mail to get things like this pushed all the way through.
And besides which, they may have almost unlimited funds, but we have unlimited bandwidth collectively...
"Our funds have never taken part in toxic or death spiral convertible financings of any sort" -BayStar's managing partne
I can understand why the EFF, the ALA, and even an underdog like Sun are signed on as supporters of this bill, but what benfits are coming to companies like Qwest, Verizon and BellSouth - all major telecom providers? These companies are spending money to fight the DMCA, but what financial benefits does the destruction of the DMCA offer them? Is Telecom innovation being hurt this much by the DMCA so much that they're willing to take up arms and fight?
Don't get me wrong, I'm happy to see the DMCA nuked. But it would seem they've found something in this bill that suits them quite nicely in a financial sense, which immediately raises my skepticism level about how positive their support really is.
...how many of you would really you use the new ability to copy music/movies/games just for backups? I hear a lot of rhetoric about this sometimes quoted "right" on these boards. I think many would see a bill like this to be open season on P2P sharing again.
My opinion is that DMCA is wrong, but that's because copyright is inherently protected by the law and that we should be able to perform actions along the fair use doctrine.
But I am afraid this type of law (though good) would just reopen the door for any person to just start sharing copyrighted material again. As consumers, we need to respect copyrights.
But they do care when the new CD they just bought won't play in their car CD player.
Jaysyn
There is a war going on for your mind.
I had a different opinion.
(1) Does our representatives care about what we think or what the majority of their constituents think?
They wont if we are the minority, and surely an Anti-DMCA bill wont be debated among the majority of its consituents as most of them dont know/dont care. But what if we as a collective, helps the general public in understanding what this bill means, how beneficial it could be for them as well as the ability to innovate, then we might have a chance.
Also by performing as a collective, there is a bigger chance of us being picked up by local media and increases our chances of being noticed by the public. Otherwise either they wont care, or even if we do make an impact, it will be far less of a magnitude.
Come on, people. This community can boast of the multitudes of free thinkers and informed citizens that posts in this forum. Only this forum can boast of the thousands of clicks that can shred a gigantic server like it were paper. Even 1/3rd of the people who post here were willing to stand shoulder to shoulder and walk down the streets of D.C, the world would sit up and take notice. Dont underestimate our power.
Rapid Nirvana
But there is very little money behind this, so the chance of this being passed is essentially nil.
I wish it wasn't. I wish that if I wrote a letter it would make a difference. But the battle lines for this were drawn decades ago and the misinformation surrounding this are so high that I'll bet most senators and representatives really feel that only evil pirates are against the DMCA at this point.
Intel's also a member of the "Trusted" Computing Platform Alliance (or TCPA). So I wouldn't rush out and buy a new P4EE to reward them for their "principled stand" here.
The bill seems to be heading in the "right" direction so this is a nitpick, but how about changing the "Consumer" to "Citizen". I'm tired of everyone, even those in government, thinking of people as consumers only. There is more to life than what/how you spend, ya' know!
Companies have constituents too. This is agreat opportunity to send positive feedback to companies that support the DMCRA, especially if you are a customer. If they perceive that their customers support them on this, then they will be more likely to spend money lobbying for this type of legislation since it may become a selling point in their service. A letter may make more of a difference than a vote.
Yes, I've donated to the EFF. The EFF is also worthy of donations (probably MORE worthy). However, the EFF doesn't have the power to sponsor or vote on legislation. There's no substitute for that.
'I ain't a liar, baby, and I ain't proud I just want what I'm not allowed.' -- Violent Femmes, 36-24-36
As a republican, I must admit that Hatch is off in hyperspace.... much more so than any one else in the Senate (and part of my job is to study those in Congress).
And although there are some "left of left" liberals in Congress, none are as nearly "off the map" as Hatch.
Happily, Hatch is a very predictable Republican vote. But if the senate were more strongly republican in general, I wouldn't mind seeing him leave.
But as the original poster claimed, that isn't going to happen.
No Apple?
However, for the most part large corporations throw their money at Republicans, not Democrats, because Republicans are usually more eager to hand out tax cuts and other corporate welfare than are Democrats. And there is a corresponding amount of Republican sucking-up to large corporations in response to this phenomenon.
No, I never said that at all, and to imply that I did is pure speculation on your part. I'm well aware of the entertainment industry's liberal bias but also aware that Sen. Hatch does provide a podium for groups like the RIAA to to get their views heard in Congress.
Like you say, special interest groups frequently grease the palms of politicians on both sides of the floor, and Hatch represents an easy way for groups to get their viewpoints heard by Congress.
Rule #1 -- Politics always trumps technology.
The sad thing is, we are oppressing ourselves. If the majority of the people were registered, and most importantly INFORMED voters, politicans simply could not be in the pockets of industry. Campaign contributions can help someone get elected by allowing them to campaign more effectively, but its votes that actually put them in office. Politicians do realize this. If the public is truely outraged about something and a lot of people are complaining to their representatives, they will side with the voters over the moneyed special interests. An example would be the telemarketing laws, passed over the objections of lobbyists because the people demanded them. When the public as a whole wakes up and demands a stop to the recording industry cartel practices, congress will listen.
with examples of 2 cases where the DMCA law is dangerous to my health/healthcare, to the point of it actually threatening my life and others like me. I described what I had done to combat those cases, which involved violating the DMCA.
In one case, after I cracked the password of a vender package, I reported the password back to the vender's help desk, where they now give it out to everyone who asks (before I cracked the password, they didn't know it, because I asked).
I urge others with such examples to do the same and give Rep Boucher more data to work with.
This is the most intelligent thing I've heard anybody say about the copy protection controversy.
Back in the 70s and early 80s HBO was broadcast through the air like DirecTV. People used to build their own receivers using antennas made out of coffee cans (I know -- I had one). After HBO had harassed and threatened antenna owners for several years, the courts finally ruled that the company couldn't control what people did with the broadcast signal in their own homes. HBO's next move was to scramble the signal, which was easily defeated by those with access to spectrum analyzers but largely stymied the coffee-can community. The eventual solution was for HBO to join the cable world.
I always thought this was the sensible way to handle the controversy. Make companies do business in the real world, rather than letting them reshape it to their needs. Lately our government has gone in the opposite direction, with legislators tailoring laws to suit the demands of their financial backers.
One thing that must be repeated over and over is that copyright infringement is not stealing, because copyright is not property. It's a temporary restriction imposed on everybody except the copyright holder. Copyright holders don't "own" anything, and copyright doesn't give them any extra rights, it takes rights away from everybody else for a limited time. Copyright infringement may cause financial losses, but so do lots of other things -- arson, vandalism, assault, murder, for example -- and we don't call those things theft.
It's important to keep repeating this because the content industry has essentially hijacked the concepts of property ownership and theft. They play the part of the little old lady chasing a purse snatcher, and they label critics of current copyright laws as socialists threatening the whole concept of private property.