Slashdot Mirror
Copyright Bill could Stifle Innovation
binder520 writes "Wired has an article on how the latest Senate Bill, sponsored by Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), will hold technology companies liable for supplying devices or software that can be used to illegally copy music, videos, software, etc. It looks like it is time to write to your senators, because the verbiage in the bill is too subjective for any technology company to stand up to the media giants. Say good bye to your VCR, MP3 players, CD/DVD burners, etc."
Do politicians in America go out of their way to stifle innovation or is it just my perception?
Read Atlas Shrugged. These laws are not being put in place to be followed. There are there to be selectively enforced.
"Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
He got caught, so he wants everyone else to suffer too.
The mere fact that Wired and the WSJ are both running stories against this bill suggest it has zero chance of ever passing. But it's nice to see a traditional print newspaper warm to some of the issues near and dear to nerd hearts.
Oh, here's the link to the WSJ article, but it probably requires (pay) subscription.
I vote against Hatch every year. Unfortunatly he's part of the local political system and the LDS Church loves him so he won't be voted out.
And he knows it -- he really doesn't care what he does to the people of Utah (or the rest of you). He knows that nobody will hold him accountable. As long as he keeps getting his kickbacks from his big corporation buddies he's happy. Complaints from the "little people" (us) don't even register.
One of the best things he's managed to do is convince the local news outlets (the biggest being owned by the LDS Church) to never report on what he is doing in Congress (aside from when he gets voted "best dressed..") If the citizens of Utah were kept up to date about the legislation he proposes and what his votes are there would be a huge outcry for him to be tossed out on his ass. Supposedly the natives here (I'm not one of them) value things like privacy, personal rights, etc. All the things that Orrin's bills seek to take away.
Invalid Checksum. Retrying.
Except something like 40% or more of corporations pay little or NO income tax at all. The largest pay the least (good corporate tax lawyers are worth their weight in gold). Little guys, you know, the ones that tend to inovate most get screwed. About four years ago (give or take a year), Microsoft posted huge profits for the year and payed NO income tax at all. So while they LOVE to complain of high tax rates, big companies don't even come close to acually PAYING them.
I still don't understand Hatch. I've said this before, but I remember Hatch kicking Hillary Roisen's ass about fair use early in the debates. At the time he led a heroic effort to stop the RIAA from imposing undue restrictions. I don't understand why he changed his mind...
E.g. from: http://www.insightmag.com/news/2001/01/15/Music/TAlong with the nation's teen-agers, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Orrin Hatch of Utah is an unlikely proponent of the online music company. A key Hatch aide recently left Capitol Hill to become Napster's chief lobbyist in Washington. Unbeknownst to many, Hatch is a prolific, yet frustrated, songwriter who says Napster is a great way to get your music known if you don't get a record deal.
"For every Metallica, there are thousands of talented songwriters whose music will never be recorded, talented musicians whose work will never be heard by the public. Peer-to-peer technology (like Napster) may help some of these artists," Hatch said in an interview with Inside magazine.
Or the bill could be decided by the leadership to be of extreme importance and put on a fast track to go through subcommittee, committee and on the floor in the matter of weeks, if not days. There is no requirement that there are hearings on a bill, and while there may be outcry, members and senators are not in a real fear of losing their job because they did not hold a hearing on a bill (unless there is public outcry).
Or it could be attached as a rider to another bill or to the approps bill. There are many ways that a motivated Congress can quickly pass bills. While this is a general good outline of the process, it is not uniform and many bills have been approved quickly when the leadership (particularly if both parties) wants it. A good example you know about...Patriot Act that was passed within weeks. You don't know about the tons of other examples because they happen without much fanfare.
I hated Orrin Hatch before it was cool. Remember the methamphetamine anti-proliferation act? The one that would prohibit the dissemination of information about how to get, use, or make drugs?
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
Yeah, but the major media powers would hate that, since you wouldn't need to consume anything new. What they should do it come up with a way to make you forget the actual content, just that you really liked it (no matter if you really did). Then you'd want to buy the next great thing from them.
Thanks to McCain-Feingold, that's no longer necessary.
You just don't mention your candidate by name and you can spend all you want any way you want.
You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.