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."

87 of 597 comments (clear)

  1. Memory Copyright Infringements Next? by mfh · · Score: 5, Funny

    Pretty soon, it's going to be illegal to even look at or listen to something covered by copyright protection. If you think about it, our brains keep a copy of everything we come into contact with in our memories. With science ever progressing towards Utopia, it won't be long before we are able to access and re-experience memories as if we were right there in the moment we first experienced them. "Just look in this little pen right here and say cheese! *FLASH* You will not remember anything about seeing Men In Black 7. You will be happy and do something special for everyone in your life. Thank you from the MPAA!"

    --
    The dangers of knowledge trigger emotional distress in human beings.
    1. Re:Memory Copyright Infringements Next? by radixvir · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You will not remember anything about seeing Men In Black 7.

      I wish i couldnt remember anything about seeing the first two, thats for sure.

      But seriously, how many people hate Orin Hatch at this point? he seems to sell out to about any company gives him money. i wish this guy would just go away.

    2. Re:Memory Copyright Infringements Next? by boarder · · Score: 4, Informative

      You have no idea how right (well, wrong, but factually correct) that idea is.

      Read the actual text of the UK decision PS2 modchips.

      Sony wanted the judge to rule that flashing the infringing material on the screen is the same as storing infringing material in RAM, which is the same as storing it in ROM, which is the same as illegally copying the game. They said that just showing the game on the screen is the same as illegally copying a game.

      Things might not have gone that far if the modchip in question didn't copy the game to RAM in order to play foreign/homebrew/cracked games. The copying to RAM is what the judge ruled was infringing Sony's copyright. Sony thinks that showing it on the screen was enough to be called an illegal copy. The judge seemed happy that he didn't have to rule on that.

      --
      IANAL, but I play one on /.
    3. Re:Memory Copyright Infringements Next? by billcopc · · Score: 4, Funny

      Isn't that the dictionary definition of "senator" ? An old worthless sack of protoplasm that turns money into law proposals ?

      Day in the life of a senator:

      1. golf in the morning
      2. scam people on ebay
      3. trade real-estate
      4. molest 14yr old niece
      5. check up on today's wire transfers
      6. get ridiculously drunk at the steakhouse
      7. sit on the board and make some laws

      --
      -Billco, Fnarg.com
    4. Re:Memory Copyright Infringements Next? by Hatta · · Score: 3, Interesting

      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!
    5. Re:Memory Copyright Infringements Next? by Esion+Modnar · · Score: 2, Funny
      I wish i couldnt remember anything about seeing the first two, thats for sure.

      Actually, that would be cool. You could get a lot of mileage out of your favorite novel:

      Hey! A Tom Clancy novel I haven't read!
      Boof!
      Hey! A Tom Clancy novel I haven't read!
      Boof!
      Hey!...

      --

      They say the first thing to go is your penis. Well, it's either that or your brain. I forget which...
    6. Re:Memory Copyright Infringements Next? by Skidge · · Score: 3, Interesting

      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.

    7. Re:Memory Copyright Infringements Next? by djmurdoch · · Score: 2, Interesting

      They'd make sure that the boof! also wiped out the book:

      Hey, a new Tom Clancy book! Here's $9.95.
      boof!
      Hey, a new Tom Clancy book! Here's $9.95.
      boof!

    8. Re:Memory Copyright Infringements Next? by Tablizer · · Score: 2, Insightful

      7. sit on the board and make some laws

      They don't make the laws themselves. They just copy-and-paste the biz lobbyists' drafts.

    9. Re:Memory Copyright Infringements Next? by superpulpsicle · · Score: 2, Funny

      Hey everyone let's ALL use windows to share copies of some random movie. We'll bring Microsoft down with this bill.

    10. Re:Memory Copyright Infringements Next? by pgnas · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Couldn't agree with this more... What a worthless waste!

      It is so tiring reading about how these people want to legislate the hell out of everything.

      I am far from an anarchist, I beleive in laws and regulations, however, I am a firm beleiver that it is the people that should be running this country and not the sorry politicians whose only goal in life is to make life easier for a select group of people.

      I do beleieve that laws can stifle progress. Once more, it is so tiring watching lawmakers in the US proposing methods of government on the Internet. These ridiculous laws passed in the US will do nothing to stop development of software in other countries, in addition, the Internet will continue to propogate the software around the world.

      The only thing that I would have to say to my Senator if he were looking at siding with this legisation would be to get a life! There are far too many more important things to deal with that would genuinely improve the quality of life in the US.

    11. Re:Memory Copyright Infringements Next? by orangesquid · · Score: 2, Insightful

      copy and paste? NO! ILLEGAL!

      Until this bill passes, take a last few moments to enjoy these---
      1. Text editors with copy and paste features
      2. Operating systems that let you copy files
      3. CPUs (such as intel's x86 series) with built-in string-copying operations
      4. Xerox machines
      5. Printers
      6. Cameras
      7. Research papers that quote any sources
      8. Cell Mitosis
      9. Mass production
      10. Gutenberg press

      Then, prepare yourself for a moment of silence.
      In fact, prepare yourself for a lifetime of silence. Those words are in a copyrighted dictionary, after all.

      --
      --TheOrangeSquid Is it any wonder things seem so awry? We swim in a sea of confusion and don't have to think to survive
  2. Wow by DigitalSpyder · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Do politicians in America go out of their way to stifle innovation or is it just my perception?

    1. Re:Wow by jcr · · Score: 4, Funny

      ... just like politicians everywhere else.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    2. Re:Wow by Donoho · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Taken from Wired article: "The bill as it is currently drafted is extremely broad and not entirely clear. It would, at a minimum, undermine the Sony Betamax decision."

      Innovation isn't the target, just an acceptable liability. Politicians that submit/subscribe to such legislation are clearly more concerned about protecting the pockets of corporations/industries at the expense of technological innovation or cultural changes that would shift power away from them.

    3. Re:Wow by smchris · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I believe politicians will consistently tell you they aren't scientists and therefore benefit from the experience of corporate experts (aka lobbyists).

      After all, nobody actually reads, much less understands, the bills they vote on. They say that these days like it actually is a defensible excuse.

    4. Re:Wow by Simonetta · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Do politicians in America go out of their way to stifle innovation or is it just my perception?

      Politicians in the US are seriously busy, they often don't read the laws that they vote on. They vote the party line. The bills (proposed laws) are written by the politician's aides who move back and forth between government and industry.

      Passing really bad laws will, in the long run, just transfer innovation to areas of the world outside of US control and influence.

    5. Re:Wow by bergerjs · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Senator Hatch has a propensity for standing up for something that he has an interest in, even if it will adversely affect countless others.

      But this law is supposed to help the children! That's why its called the "Inducement Devolves into Unlawful Child Exploitation Act." People keep wondering why someone won't think of the children; Mr. Hatch has thought of the children, and wants the exploitation to stop!

      Having a bill with a name like that, anyone who votes against it must hate children, or at the very least be a communist.
    6. Re:Wow by pyrrhonist · · Score: 4, Funny
      I'm too lazy to figure out how to put a link in here so you can look it up on Google like I did.

      I did like you said, and looked up on Google how to insert a link.

      You start out like this:

      <a href="
      and then you add the url. For example, a Google result on Orrin Hatch and bills would be:
      http://www.google.com/search?q=orrin+hatch+bills
      and then finish the tag with:
      ">
      The you add a nice description:
      Orrin Hatch Bills on Google
      and finally, you add the closing tag:
      </A>
      This ends up making a link that looks like this:
      Orrin Hatch Bills on Google
      It doesn't seem all that difficult, and looks like it could add a whole lot to the discussion.

      I heard that there was even a tool for browsers to help with things like this.

      In summary: u g0t pwned.

      --
      Show me on the doll where his noodly appendage touched you.
    7. Re:Wow by erpbridge · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The interesting thing is that Orrin Hatch loves dealing with copyright restriction bills as they refer to technology and the Internet. Just scroll down to the bottom of Slashdot's page, and just search for "hatch", and you'll see a ton of them.

      I believe he voted for the Sonny Bono copyright act, which extended copyrights (especially Disney's copyright on Michael Moose) to life of author + 70 years (law argument: the cartoon character in question was made while in employ of a company. The company doesn't die. When is "life" determined?) We don't know Hatch's yea or Nea on this one, because it was a voice vote in both chambers of Senate (see Wikipedia, Sonny Bono Copyright Act).

      Of course, Hatch also was interested in the Remotely destroy filetraders PC's technology. Gotta love this guy.

      Anyone know if Fritz Hollings (Disney Senator) is still in Senate? He's another copyright law junkie along the same lines.

    8. Re:Wow by gcaseye6677 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Actually, many of the corporate abuses in the early 1900s are exactly what led to worker's rights legislation, workers comp and other safety programs, minimum wage laws, securities regulation, anti-monopoly laws, and many other regulations. I don't know what kind of system you would propose that would protect the little guy, but I think you need to remember that there are limits to what companies can do, and the more corrupt they become, the more efforts are made to reign them in. Example: corporate fraud is being cracked down on quite a bit now. The former Enron and Worldcom executives have been indicted, along with many other white collar criminals.

    9. Re:Wow by BitterAndDrunk · · Score: 2, Informative

      Most of the abuses to workers, etc. were corrected not by the goverment but by unions. In fact, the goverment sided with corporations against unions quite often and still do today. One glaring example is the Pullman Strike. Text from probably a book for third graders "The Pullman Strike in 1894, at the Pullman plant near Chicago, the American Railroad Union (not affiliated with the AFL and led by Eugene V. Debs, a leading American socialist) struck the company's manufacturing plant and called for a boycott of the handling of Pullman's sleeping and parlor cars on the nation's railroads. Within a week, 125,000 railroad workers were engaged in a sympathy protest strike. The government swore in 3,400 special deputies; later, at the request of the railroad association, President Cleveland moved in federal troops to break the strike-despite a plea by Gov. Aitgeld of Illinois that their presence was unnecessary. Finally a sweeping federal court injunction forced an end to the sympathy strike, and many railroad workers were blacklisted. The Pullman strikers were essentially starved into submissive defeat. The strike illustrated the increasing tendency of the government to offer moral support and military force to break strikes. The injunction, issued usually and almost automatically by compliant judges on the request of government officials or corporations, became a prime legal weapon against union organizing and action." It's folly to expect the government to act in the interests of "the little guy". The only reason change occured was due to "the little guys" banding together to become a force equal to or greater than the corporations that were raping them. SO, you know, vote and stuff.

      --
      You better watch out, there may be dogs about . . .
  3. Orrin Hatch is a corporate whore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    It's time to nuke Utah since it only seems to produce annoying dipshits.

  4. Orrin Hatch? by Monkelectric · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Why is it that every time congress is doing something incredibly evil -- Orrin Hatch is involved?

    Note to Utah: Its time for you guys to deal with this guy and kick his ass around the block!

    --

    Religion is a gateway psychosis. -- Dave Foley

    1. Re:Orrin Hatch? by thogard · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I don't know about you, but I refused to do business with people in Utah because of their inability to deal with electing senators and I'm happy to tell them that and I do take my business elsewhere. Too bad he's not up for reelection for another two years. Ever notice that everything he does seems to be more involved with other states than his own? I don't think he's been working for the people of Utah since maybe the 1980's.

    2. Re:Orrin Hatch? by kmahan · · Score: 4, Interesting

      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.
    3. Re:Orrin Hatch? by Percy_Blakeney · · Score: 2, Insightful
      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.

      The LDS church doesn't back Hatch or any other politician. Of course, he is LDS and thus the Mormon majority tends to identify with him more, but that does not mean the LDS church itself "loves" him. They are very careful to avoid even the appearance of supporting a particular candidate, even going so far as to having a statement read in all church meetings every election cycle explicitly saying so.

      And he knows it -- he really doesn't care what he does to the people of Utah (or the rest of you).

      I don't like the positions he's taking either, but to claim that he is ambivalent to Utah and the nation's fate is wrong. Maybe you should listen to some of his speeches; you may not agree with him, but he does appear to really think he is helping people.

      Complaints from the "little people" (us) don't even register.

      Welcome to politics, both inside and outside of Utah.

      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.

      Ok, this is just totally bogus. The citizens of Utah tend to be quite conservative, thus agreeing with many, if not most, of Hatch's proposals. In addition, to claim that KSL (the LDS-owned media outlet) has an agreement of some sort with Hatch is just ridiculous. It sounds more like a conspiracy theory than a rational thought.

    4. Re:Orrin Hatch? by doczarkhov · · Score: 2, Interesting

      When I voted against him last time, he was still pretty popular, but I've been hearing a lot of complaints lately. Oh, and by the way, not only am I LDS, but a native. As for writing to him to change his mind, whenever I do that I get a response that feels like he's patting me on the head, saying, "Ah, gee, that's so cute that you believe that." Maybe I should run. And, as a matter of Hatch related silliness, was anyone aware that Hatch's son is one of the major lawyers for SCO? At least, that's what the article I read on MSNBC said.

    5. Re:Orrin Hatch? by Brian+Boitano · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Complaints from the "little people" (us) don't even register.

      Perhaps if the complaint was delivered at high speed in jacketed hollow-point form?

      --
      What would Brian Boitano do?
    6. Re:Orrin Hatch? by krazo · · Score: 2, Interesting

      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

      Is there a website with this information? There should be a place you could go to see what your state senators and local representatives proposed, what committees they are on and what came out of those committees, and how they voted on various bills and issues.

      I know this information is public, but I'm not sure there is a good way for the public to access it and there definitely should be. If anyone knows of a website, please fill me in.

  5. Non-Story by c0dedude · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Hatch introduces these radical bills all the time. This one is Pre- committee. Nothing to see here folks, move along.

    --
    Since when has this country used intellectual elite as a pejorative term?
    1. Re:Non-Story by Erwos · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I agree.

      For those not in the know, introducing something to a committee means the "new bills Senate committee" (not the real name, but it conveys the point) is going to take a look at the thing. If they think it's worth their time, they'll spend some time revising it and then introduce it to the floor of the Senate for discussion and a vote.

      Bills often change a _LOT_ during committee. And many of them die there. Considering how obviously stupid this one is, it's probably going to be killed in committee. Give the committee a little credit - for every bad bill that gets through, a hundred others die right there.

      As usual, though, /. makes this look like a done deal waiting for the president's signature, when in fact it'll probably go nowhere. People might pay a little more attention if things were less alarmist all the time...

      -Erwos

      --
      Plausible conjecture should not be misrepresented as proof positive.
    2. Re:Non-Story by The+Importance+of · · Score: 4, Informative

      Not entirely. Hatch tried to sneak this through to a vote without a hearing. Opposition forced him to have a hearing, but he wants a revised bill after August. There is a lot going on here. See, INDUCE Act Archives and LawMeme's Index.

    3. Re:Non-Story by c0dedude · · Score: 4, Informative

      Nope, not the way it works. Here's how a bill gets passed. This one is about at step 2 1/2.
      1. A senator and a member of the house get togather and write a bill.
      2. They drop it in their respective drop boxes, and GPO prints it up.
      3. Committee representitives say whether they want a hearing on it.
      4. Subcommitees tell their committees whether they want a hearing on it.
      5. Hearings are held, and each bill is modified.
      6. Assuming the bill doesn't die in Committee, and most of them do, it goes to the rules committee for the Senate and the House. A lot of them die this way, too.
      7. The rules committee schedules a vote. If they don't, time passes, Congress adjourns, bill dies.
      8. Both the House and Senate vote. If one doesn't support the bill, bill dies. These are timed votes, and if you can't get a majority within about 15 minutes (usually) that's it.
      9. Assuming all of the above has occured, you get a conference committee of Representitives and Senators who will hammer out a comprimise between the House and Senate versions. If they can't agree, it dies.
      10. Then the President can sign or veto. If he vetos, or refuses to act in 10 days (Pocket Veto), the bill dies UNLESS 2/3 of the House and Senate vote to override it. This rarely (in less than 1/10th of vetoes) occurs. If they dont, the bill dies.

      All of this has to occur in about 5 1/2 months.

      --
      Since when has this country used intellectual elite as a pejorative term?
    4. Re:Non-Story by sacrilicious · · Score: 2, Insightful
      People might pay a little more attention if things were less alarmist all the time...

      After the DMCA passed, the term "alarmist" was severely deprecated in my vocabulary. Then the "patriot" act, the "spy on your neighbors" hotline, the Abu Graihb stuff happening from the top down... I'm sorry, I just don't get the term "alarmist" any more. This country is disintegrating right in front of our eyes, right now.

      --
      - First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then ???, then profit.
    5. Re:Non-Story by dcgaber · · Score: 4, Interesting

      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.

    6. Re:Non-Story by zurab · · Score: 2, Insightful
      1. A senator and a member of the house get togather and write a bill.

      Dream on! Bills are written by industry group (read: cartel) and corporate lawyers. Many congressmen/women don't even read texts of the bills they vote on, at least as far as I know.
  6. Address of Your Senator/Representative by mlmitton · · Score: 5, Informative
    I thought it would be helpful to point out a link where you can find the address and phone numbers of your representatives.

    For the house:

    http://clerk.house.gov/members/index.html

    For the senate:

    http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/ senators_cfm.cfm>

    Let's make a difference!

    --
    "My girlfriend's got sodium laureth sulfate hair."
    1. Re:Address of Your Senator/Representative by Geekenstein · · Score: 4, Informative
      Even better yet, our friends at the EFF make this as easy as point and click:

      EFF Action Center

      They produce a very thorough draft letter for just about every one of these evil bills.

  7. Rendering your 35mm film camera illegal... by IBitOBear · · Score: 4, Insightful

    No really, every single company that makes anything that proports to "remember" anything what-so-ever "can be used" to "remember" a copy of a copyrighted work.

    Every single industry on the planet should be against these measures, including the artists.

    Relying on "the governments" or "the courts" to "get around to deciding where the draw the line" on *any* matter (as a founding assumption of proposing the mater in the first place) should be punishable by death.

    At first reading this may sound like a Troll, or on overstating the case, but if you follow the bouncing dollar bill, you will see that these "statements of vision disguised as law" are simply vast resivours of entropy trying to suck the life (money, rights, and intellegence) out of our culture.

    [I guess I am ranting, but what exactly *will* it take to get the people, any people, to listen?]

    --
    Innocent people shouldn't be forced to pay for inferior software development.
    --"Code Complete" Microsoft Press
  8. Orrin Hatch is just pissed... by john_smith_45678 · · Score: 4, Funny

    that nobody is copying his music

    http://www.hatchmusic.com/

    1. Re:Orrin Hatch is just pissed... by kerrbear · · Score: 4, Interesting

      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/Th e-Napster.Challenge-210824.shtml

      Along 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.

    2. Re:Orrin Hatch is just pissed... by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 2, Informative

      Back in the days of napster, Orin's position was influenced by a top aide, Manus Cooney. Apparently Manus was pretty akamai about copyright, but he eventually left (perhaps lost an internal power-struggle, complete speculation on my part) and went to work as a lobbiest for Napster. I don't know where Manus Cooney is now (probably because I haven't bothered to google the guy) but in his absence, Hatch was quickly drawn to the darkside with a number of unethical enticements like the publication and subsequent mass-"purchases" of one of his own, quite pathetic, musical performances.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
  9. Very interesting... by Creepy+Crawler · · Score: 3, Insightful

    How you can create a law and have everyone be in violation at the same time..

    Havent our prisons been filled up yet? And now "5 Years for Unauthorized Duplication".

    Real violent criminals we have here, eh?

    Also if I recall, why is the RIAA helping with this guy? Isnt there a law saying a IRS recognized orginization CANNOT have political affiliation or be in support of a certain political affiliation? And there.. seems to be a excess of money going to the Repubs from record *associations* and org's.

    --
  10. OK lets see Hatch take the same stand on guns. by museumpeace · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Guess what the senator says about holding gun companies liable for murders committed with their products?

    --
    SLASHDOT: news for people who can't concentrate on work or have no life at all and got tired of yelling back at the TV.
  11. Read Atlas Shrugged. by Kenja · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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?"
    1. Re:Read Atlas Shrugged. by roystgnr · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Atlas Shrugged has nothing to do with it.

      Atlas Shrugged has a quote describing this exact pattern of behavior: "There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What's there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced nor objectively interpreted - and you create a nation of law-breakers - and then you cash in on guilt."

      And it's a popular enough quote that I found it in five seconds searching for "atlas shrugged laws"

      Ayn Rand wasn't the first one to make that observation.

      Probably not. Did the person you're replying to say she was? Can you name the person who was first?

  12. Hatch is just bitter by Locke355 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    He got caught, so he wants everyone else to suffer too.

  13. Shooting thyself in thy foot? by AtariKee · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "Say good bye to your VCR, MP3 players, CD/DVD burners, etc."

    And your customers.

    --
    "You're getting brutal, Sark. Brutal and needlessly sadistic."
    "Thank you, Master Control"
    -Sark and the MCP
  14. Microsoft by Mdalek · · Score: 3, Insightful


    Well in that case, microsoft should be sued first, as Windows is used more than anything else, in copying + distributing illegal files

    (sarcasm)

  15. Or... by tgd · · Score: 3, Funny

    Note to Everyone Else: Its time for us to deal with Utah and kick their ass around the block. ;-)

  16. Copyright Stifles Innovation by Matrix272 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Is it just an oversight on the part of readers, or journalists, or Slashdot editors, or some combination of the above to ignore many other things that also stifle innovation, like high taxes? Isn't it at all possible that more companies would invest in research and development if they could afford to do so, but they cannot because too much of the potential profits are seized by the government?

    --
    "It's better to have a gun and not need it than need a gun and not have it." ~ Christian Slater, True Romance
    1. Re:Copyright Stifles Innovation by Hemlock+Stones · · Score: 4, Interesting

      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.

  17. Intel against it too by ctr2sprt · · Score: 4, Interesting
    A director and former executive VP of Intel also wrote an editorial, for the Wall Street Journal no less, bringing up mostly the same points. He's concerned that even stuff like CPUs could be considered "inducements" under this bill. He doesn't think that would ultimately fly in the courts, but he says it would have a really chilling effect on innovation. He used Intel as an example. If this bill had been around back when Intel were starting out, they might not have been able to get investment because of legal concerns. So it doesn't even matter if anyone actually prosecuted under the bill: its mere existence would be enough to discourage investment and innovation.

    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.

  18. Who would want to living in the US by Wilkshake · · Score: 2, Insightful
    It seems almost every day that there's an article posted here on /. about US politicians bringing up new bills and laws that anybody with some kind of intelligence would just dismiss as ridiculous. Basic freedoms of information and technology being clamped down by archaic/draconian laws.

    For the country that's supposed to be the "Land of the Free" and the supposed defender of democracy and open government, there certainly doesn't seem to be much of that sort of thing going on at the moment.
    -

    --

    -
    "I may have invented it, but Bill made it famous." - David Bradley, inventor of Ctrl-Alt-Del
  19. . . . and in other news, Europe pulls ahead by Brad+Cossette · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Good grief, you'd think this legislation was drafted by someone who wanted to cripple the U.S. Economy for good. On the one hand, we have problems with outsourced jobs, economy still struggling to recover, terrorist threats, middle-east unrest . . . and some senators feel that now's a good time to give lawyers even more things to sue companies for??????

    You know, I've thought about going into law school - it seems the jobs are leaving the IT industry and heading that way . . .

    But seriously - at what point can we just say to the entertainment industry "live with it"? How long has the software industry lived with software piracy for better and worse?

    I'll say this - all those countries that have been worried about the corrupting influence of American culture, don't worry. Senator Hatch is working very hard to make sure that there's no possible way for any of that culture to escape the country.

    --
    -- "We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars" [Oscar Wilde]
  20. What about my Furby? by earthforce_1 · · Score: 2, Funny


    I guess that makes him (or it?) an outlaw. Or maybe future Furby's will be programmed to self-destruct if your 2 year old sings them a copyright tune, like the Barney theme or happy birthday. Does this make my telephone voice mail an illegal circumvention device? Somebody might call me up and hum a copyrighted song, better unplug it....

    Has this guy ever thought of moving to N. Korea? I bet he would love it there. Too bad for him that East Germany no longer exists. He would have made a wonderful Stazi bureaucrat.

    Actually, somebody should propose an amendment to his bill which would also hold liable the manufacturer of any technology which could be used to reproduce copyright printed matter as well, so we can outlaw computers, typewriters, photocopiers, paper, pens, etc. Just to show how looney this really gets.

    --
    My rights don't need management.
  21. Re:Just great... by mcpkaaos · · Score: 5, Funny

    Q: What could be worse than marrying a mormon?

    A: Marrying two.

    --
    It goes from God, to Jerry, to me.
  22. Stupid laws yet again by Spineless+Jellyfish · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It is becoming increasingly common for legislators try to get any bill passed, no matter the constitutionality of it.

    Between the defense of marriage act earlier today and this, I am just so disgusted with the whole lot of them.

    With the betamax decision, it was ruled that it is ok to make personal copies of tv shows. It is logical that the same could be said of recorders of CDs to MP3s or (preferably) OGG or FLAC.

    So now Hatch comes up with a bill that would do nothing but tie up the courts (after causing pause to innovators) until it is ruled unconstitutional and we are back where we started.

    Then Hatch comes up with practically the same bill all over again, and the process continues ad infinitum (sigh)

  23. Re:Vote Libertarian by jcr · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I am maddened by the continually increasing insanity of American Lawmakers.

    You're confusing insanity with evil.

    -jcr

    --
    The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
  24. Do something about it! by GeorgeH · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You can email your senators or fax your senators and tell them to wise up.

    Or you can sit around and post comments on Slashdot that no one with the power to change things will ever read.

    --
    Why can't I moderate something "Wrong" or at least "Grossly Misinformed"?
  25. Before the complaining gets too bad by techiemac · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Before everyone invests a lot of energy posting with the usual "this sucks" and "In Soviet Russia" quote (I bet they will all follow my post now that I said that :) ), those of us that are Americans need to exercise our rights. Often your Congressman/woman and Senator will have "town meetings" when they are in your state. Go to these! Even if there isn't a hot topic at the time (there always is with technology), we, as a Slashdot community, have the oppertunity to provide and gather valuable insight and let our voices be heard. Do you wonder why Medicare, Social Security, etc is always such a hot topic in elections? Well most of the people that I see at these meetings are elderly.

    There are very few people under the age of 50 there and as a result, our elected officials only get a small piece of the story. Often bad bills make it through because people spend too much time complaining to their friends and not enough time educating the government. Most of the people that I have met in that line of work are not malicous with these bills, they just simply have a skewed view given to them by some lobbyist.

    It is up to us, the people, to educate on the potential ramifications of these poorly written bills. We simply cannot assume that Senator X sits in his office and rebuilds his Linux Kernal all day. These men and women work on running this country and not on running their computers (though some of them do have a techie streak in them).

    The best advice here is to do what the article says. Everyone set as their first task tommorow afternoon (I belive Senate is in session until mid afternoon tommorow, you can check on senate.gov), before the ADHD kicks in ;), to call your Senator AND Congressman. Be polite, address them properly (though you will probably only speak to one of their office staff members), and explain the situation in terms the general public can understand (none of "Well it contains and A to D converter and if you stream an analog signal in then..."). Often you will find your Senator and Congressman/woman to be very rational and understanding of the situation.

    Good Luck!

  26. Re:Good Jesus... by crimethinker · · Score: 3, Insightful
    I don't know why senators even bring this stuff up. There's no chance in hell that this will pass

    It's bargaining, just like when you're buying a car. The salesweasel starts high and comes down, while you start low and come up.

    With the laws, they start with the most obscene and fascist stuff short of getting themselves impeached. Then, when they've "come down on price" a little, it appears reasonable by comparison.

    -paul

    --
    Pistol caliber is like religion: everyone has their favourite, and theirs is the only right choice.
  27. I don't think this bill goes far enough! by mikeophile · · Score: 2, Interesting

    We can't be content with merely banning devices that can illegally copy copyrighted material.

    We need to ban any device that can potentially play illegal media!

    No child is safe while televisions and music players exist which could possibly corrupt their minds with illegally copied media!

    Ban all Media Players now!

  28. Re:Didnt we hear this last week? by k12linux · · Score: 2, Interesting
    It wont pass either, like most of his garbage, but still scary hes still trying.

    What is scary to me is that the money behind these types of bills can afford to have someone re-introduce them over and over, perhaps just changing the wording a little. All it takes is for one of them to slip by unnoticed and get passed. Then we have a law in place and it would be hard to remove it.

    For anybody who thinks that it's easy to get a stupid law removed from the books, consider the 1937 law which sets the price of milk based on how far the dairy farm is from Eau Claire, Wisconsin. (The further away, the more you get.) The idea was to encourage dairy production outside of WI.

    According to USDA statistics, milk production in California is over 63% higher than that in Wisconsin. Despite how obvious it is that this law is bogus, it still wasn't overturned when it was due to expire around 1999. Guess the contributions and PAC money did the trick.

    So obviously, if Hatch manages to get one of these rediculous laws passed, we'll probably be stuck with it indefinately.

  29. Logical extension = ammo makers sued for murders by Engineer+Andy · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If it is possible to prosecute for the illegal use of a product which has a legal and legitimate use, then surely by extension it will only be a matter of time before someone (unless they already have) sues bullet makers for providing the means to kill people.

    I know that guns don't kill people, it is people that kill people, but a VCR / CDR / generic recording device does have legitimate uses that don't violate copyright.

    I am glad that I don't live in the states. If this is the model of democracy and things being done for the people rather than for the oligarchs (read the corporations the politicians seem to owe their souls to) then I would hate to see a country really in need of liberation.

    --
    "And we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son to be the Savior of the World" 1 John 4:14
  30. we h8 Orin club! by TiggertheMad · · Score: 3, Funny

    "Friends, The legislation I propose today, will make our great country a better place. In this doccument is decisive legislation to outlaw that menace to all, Orin Hatch!

    When it is passed, he will be placed in a wooden box (with plenty of food and water), and shipped to the place where he can do the most damage: North Korea. We expect the regime to be toppled within two weeks of his arrival."

    --

    HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
  31. Re:geez by XeRXeS-TCN · · Score: 2, Interesting
    From a previous Wired article:
    In the past five years, Hatch has also received $158,000 in campaign contributions from the television, movie and music industries, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.
  32. Email your Senator! by ben184 · · Score: 2, Informative

    Database of US Senator's Email Addresses

    And here are some tips on how to compose the email.

    I already sent mine.

    1. Re:Email your Senator! by ben184 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Here is what I wrote; please use it, change it if you like, and email it to your state's senators:

      (Your Senator's Name Here),

      The passing of the Inducing Infringement of Copyrights Act of 2004 (S. 2560) would be a mistake felt by both consumers and manufacturers.

      Those of us with enough personal responsiblity would suffer the most, as the price of devices manufactured for media duplication sky-rockets, due to high legal fees, and the need to develop exotic copyright-protection schemes. Due to the vague wording of the Bill, our ability to own music, movies, and other media may even disappear as consumers are forced to adopt the entertainment industries' extreme piracy prevention schemes.

      Please remove your support from this Bill, as it only punishes the law abiding citizen and an industry that produces to meet a consumer demand. As usual, the criminal would find a way around this limitation.

      Thank You,
      (Your Name Here)


      Considering the subject of this thread, I guess I should write up some legal document releasing this sample email into the public domain, so no one gets sued for using my material...

      Whatever; just send it in.

  33. Come on....... by vwjeff · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I don't think the motive behind this bill is evil. Artists deserve to be paid for their work. With that being said, I don't think Senator Hatch, Senator Daschle, Senator Frist, Senator Graham, Senator Boxer, and Senator Leahy realize the consequences of this bill.

    Members of both parties support this bill. What does that say? Think about it. Officials will not be re-elected if iPods, DVD burners, ect. are outlawed.

    Contact these Senators. Tell them how you feel about this bill. Point out the consequences created by this bill. Lastly, please stop making copyright laws a one party issue because it is not.

    1. Re:Come on....... by Tony · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Artists deserve to be paid for their work.

      Then maybe it's time for a bill that requires the industry to pay the artists?

      Right now, most recording artists see 3%-6% of the profits of their works. Most book-length authors see about 10%-15% of the profit from their work.

      I'm not saying laws protecting copyright aren't welcome; but the laws protecting copyright are already in place.

      It's disingenuous of the people backing these laws to claim they are doing it for the artists. It is rarely the artists themselves backing the bills, nor is it often the artist unions; no, it's the distributors.

      If a large number of artists came out in support of any of these bills, I'd gladly back it. But when the only artist voices I hear are saying it sucks as much as *we* think it sucks, it's usually not a bill in their best interest.

      Sorry. I think the whole, "Artists deserve to get paid!" arguments are right up there with, "We have to do this for our *children*." It's a baldface lie, and I'm offended they think I'm stupid enough to believe it.

      --
      Microsoft is to software what Budweiser is to beer.
  34. Maybe we could trade them to Canada by HangingChad · · Score: 2, Funny

    We could give them Utah if they agreed never to let Celine Dion leave the country ever again or record another CD.

    --
    That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
    1. Re:Maybe we could trade them to Canada by Dav3K · · Score: 2, Funny

      As a Canadian citizen, I respectfully decline your offer. We feel it is in our best interest to encourage Celine to travel abroad these days. But hey - thanks for thinking of us!

    2. Re:Maybe we could trade them to Canada by DShard · · Score: 2, Funny

      When we said offer we really meant demand. Further more, when we said don't let Celine go abroad, we meant death penalty. And lastly, we forgot the "or else". Kindly reconsider this mutually beneficial token of our affection.

      regards,
      Middle America

    3. Re:Maybe we could trade them to Canada by Sven+The+Space+Monke · · Score: 2, Funny

      So let me get this straight - we take Utah and Celine Dion? What's in it for us?

      --
      A man who can't pronouce "nuclear arsenal" shouldn't have one -sig ends here.
  35. Now i see why hes worried... by segfault_0 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Sen. Hatch is only protecting himself from these damn pirates, since it is practically assured that his music is on the top of pirates most wanted music lists around the globe. Or maybe hes a just the fascist pinhead he asserts himself to be.

    --

    I was crazy back when being crazy really meant something. (Charles Manson)
  36. Re:Without media creation tools... by StrongAxe · · Score: 4, Insightful

    How are people supposed to create copyrighted works in the first place?

    Er... are you suggesting that for a copyright holder to make a copy of their own works, that they can self-infringe? That's as ridiculous as saying that for someone to drive their own car, they have committed grand theft auto (the crime, not the game


    No, he's not saying this at all.

    Under Induce, manufacturers are forbidden from making devices that could conceivably be used to infringe. Which means that you couldn't burn copies of your own CDs, because CD burners could be used to burn other people's CDs, and would hence be illegal.

    This is somewhat reminiscent of the laws in Demolition Man: "Red meat is bad for you; therefore it is illegal".

  37. That's what they think... by gillbates · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It occurs to me, that as radical as this bill sounds, it is exactly what we need.

    Suppose that it was indeed illegal to merely manufacture a device that could be used for copyright infringement. Consider how society would react:

    • Cameras would be illegal because they could take pictures of copyrighted works.
    • Scanners and printers would be illegal because they could be used to reproduce photographs and copyrighted texts.
    • PC's would be illegal because they could be used for copyright infringement.
    • VCRs and tape recorders would likewise be illegal. So would video or audio recording equipment of any kind.
    • CD players would likewise be illegal - because the earphone jack could be used to pick up clear signal.
    • DVD players would be illegal because the output jack could be redirected to illegal copying equipment.
    • DVD burners would be illegal.
    • You could still buy a tv, except that it you would have to pay for the built-in DVD player as well. And you couldn't buy a model with a cable hookup unless you also signed a cable contract at the same time. And an antenna hookup wouldn't be allowed under any circumstances.

    To make a long story short, people would simply stop consuming digital media. Instead, they'd get out and socialize, or play sports, etc... instead of sitting at home in front of a computer or television. This bill would radically alter the spending habits of the American consumer, destroying the entertainment industry in the process:

    • About 30% of the MPAA member company profits are from DVD rentals. They could kiss that 30% goodbye.
    • The RIAA would likewise be affected - even moreso; who would buy a CD when there are no CD players? Instead, we'd just listen to the radio - the RIAA would suffer about a 85 - 95% decrease in revenue (Only the songwriters get paid for airtime).

    I gaurantee this wouldn't last five years before it would be overturned.

    What the RIAA and MPAA don't realize is that a substantial part of the value of a CD or DVD is the ability to 1.) make a backup copy, and 2.) mix MP3 tracks for mix CD's. Without this, there's not much point - I can simply listen to the songs on the radio and never bother to buy the CD. If this law actually passed, the dearth of technology improvements would actually drive the MPAA and RIAA out of business - who will buy a CD when electronics makers no longer make CD players for fear of legal liability? Who will make a DVD player when you could be sued for doing so?

    --
    The society for a thought-free internet welcomes you.
  38. Not only electronic devices by Maljin+Jolt · · Score: 4, Insightful

    But a paper and ink will be illegal too under this bill, by definition.

    I still remember the times, when in deep communism it was illegal to own a private or non-registered typing machine (or is it typewriter in english?). At more relaxed times later, the same rule was about photo-copiers.

    So many blacklisted books were copied hand-written. You can't imagine what a breaktrough in totalitarian regime mind control was made with early 8-bit computers with dot-matrix printers.

    It seems, America is suddenly jumping backwards some 60 years of world political culture. What I cannot understand is which economy motives are driving such trend.

    --
    There you are, staring at me again.
  39. and we're supposed to pressure Congress because? by alizard · · Score: 3, Insightful
    If our technology companies can't be bothered to spend the money on politicians required to cover their own asses with respect to the ability to design consumer products in America without getting them approved by Hollywood, I'm not quite sure why we should do anything about this.

    High-tech industry seem to get what it wants on H1B/L1, R&D tax credits, unrestricted outsourcing. They've learned their lesson about paying off Congress. How do you think DOJ was persuaded to back off MS after they were declared guilty?

    Why did DMCA pass? Our technology industry just doesn't care. Why aren't technology industries trying to stop this?

    The only recent example of a united tech industry not getting what they want was the P2P bill, and IMHO, the only reason why they didn't get it stopped was that they didn't care enough to play hardball.

    People forget that the net gross revenue of the Hollywood cartel combined would be considered a roundoff error with respect to what the high-tech sector of the economy pulls in. Why do high-tech industries let themselves be the dog in the "wag the dog" scenario? Presumably, they're still hypnotized by visions of infinite future profits driven by complete customer access to all Hollywood's content (unlikely) over universal broadband (even more unlikely) with the happy customers happy to pay whatever is asked for pay-per-view/listen for content they are no longer allowed to own.

    Why hasn't the high-tech user community organized a mass action PAC along the lines of the NRA/AARP model to get what we want?

    None of us who actually has the money to start one gives a fuck. Losing on this sort of thing is just another excuse to "save money" by offshore R&D using the excuse "Sorry, but we can't employ Americans in America to do R&D, you know how much paperwork Hollywood requires to get our products approved."

    The people who've benefited from the efforts and purchases of our community are not interested in giving back, they just want to strip-mine what they can of value from us before going on to other labor/consumer markets.

    There's no useful political leadership in this area, i.e. nobody willing to buy politicians to protect our freedom to create technology, and the odds that any will develop are slim to none.

    There aren't even people we can vote for to get this sort of thing stopped. This measure has bi-partisan support, just like the DMCA had.

    The only solutions to this problem at this point are individual ones. If you want to innovate and you live in America, find a nation more friendly to innovation. That's what I'm trying to figure out how to afford to do.

    In a few years, the really cool consumer products aren't going to be coming from America anymore, and there's a good chance that they either won't be sold here or will only be available via black market.

    "Citizens always get the kind of local government they deserve."
    E.E."Doc" Smith

  40. I didn't read the article by MyDixieWrecked · · Score: 2, Insightful
    ...since I'm lazy, but...

    will hold technology companies liable for supplying devices or software that can be used to illegally copy music, videos, software, etc.

    doesn't that also include harddrives, digital cameras (think smartmedia card, memorystick, etc), computers, cell phones, notebooks (can write down song lyrics), pens, pencils, markers, knives (can carve copies of pictures), film, eyeballs, ears, brains, humans, etc, etc, etc??!?!?!?!

    I don't see any way of enforcing this or even wording it so that it would be posible and not infringe on our everyday rights. Not only do I not see any way of doing this, I don't want people to even try.

    i propose a mass suicide if the world gets that restrictive. A world that restrictive is not worth living in. A world that restrictive is worse than slavery. We're nearing that, now, with all this RIAA/MPAA bullshit.

    I understand the need to protect what's yours, but I believe it's starting to be taken too far.

    --



    ...spike
    Ewwwwww, coconut...
  41. Where's That Site? by LighthouseJ · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Does anyone know where that site is that lists all contributions made to senators and such (how much and where from)? You know, these people legally have to report all contributions and such. I've looked around for links here on slashdot, and also through numerous google searches.

    1. Re:Where's That Site? by ConceptJunkie · · Score: 3, Interesting

      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.
  42. Re:A step too far, once again. by Dr.Dubious+DDQ · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Orrin Hatch really is so deep in the **AA's pockets[...]

    What I haven't figured out is how the heck these people (if you can call them that) can claim to be representing THEIR constituents with bills like this. California legislators (especially those in Southern California districts) I can understand, and maybe some of the New York ones...but as far as I can tell, Utah is about as dependent on Big Media for their economy as South Carolina (i.e. Fritz Hollings) is...This particular senator's wild-eyed berserk enthusiasm for grossly overeager "Copyright Protection(tm)" particularly baffles me in light of the fact that it puts him AGAINST the "Clean Flicks"** people in their case, and his state especially seems to like those.

    Is it really just that "The Two Parties(tm)" really ARE the Disneycrats and Ruperticans* as I've been calling them for the past several years, run by their respective media masters?

    (* - as in Rupert Murdoch/Fox Network, in case anyone didn't guess that...)

    (** - "Clean Flicks" is a company that buys original media, then edits out the "objectionable" parts that might offend the delicate sensibilities of viewers, especially in the Utah/Idaho area, such as naked people, discussions of icky things, and bad words. While my personal feelings towards this attitude range from contempt to disgust to anger, it is for philosophical/artistic reasons, and I nonetheless think that they are FIRMLY within what ought to be obviously legal actions within the doctrines of "Fair Use" and "First Sale" to anyone that isn't being paid off by media lobbyists...or at least that's my opinion.)

  43. Re:Sony says it will supply replacement discs by joeljkp · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'm inclined to set up a website that urges people to ask Sony for replacement CDs of their PS2 games (assuming this case is about PS2?).

    If they won't provide replacements, they've proven themselves liars in court. If they charge for replacements, they've undone their argument that there's no reason to have a backup.

    Wanna help?

    --
    WeRelate.org - wiki-based genealogy
  44. Re:Sony says it will supply replacement discs by Rakarra · · Score: 2, Funny
    Since there is no necessity to make a back up, there is no justification for having one."

    Do they really do this? For no charge?

    The games are free, but there is a shipping and handling fee that runs from $30-$50, depending on the game.