Savebetamax.org National Call-in Day

Rinisari writes "Savebetamax.org, a project of Downhill Battle, has set up a national call-in day for September 14th. They ask that on that day, each person signed up call a specific congressperson about the INDUCE act in an effort to keep a steady stream of calls all day. The "Save Betamax" nomenclature comes from the fact that the INDUCE act could reverse the decision in the 1984 Sony v. Universal case regarding Sony's Betamax VTRs and copying of copyrighted movies."

Comments

I tried to publicise it.

[caluml]

I modded this comment up, but some kind souls modded it down again.

RTFA and blurb

[frankthechicken]

Then read the actual ruling.

It would be madness if Hollywood et al got their way, if only because as the article stated, Hollywood benefitted enourmously from sales of VCR.

Coral cache

[Anonymous Coward]

http://www.savebetamax.org.nyud.net:8090/
http://www.downhillbattle.org.nyud.net:8090/
http://www.virtualrecordings.com.nyud.net:8090/bet amax.htm

c'mon people.. we talk about using coral to prevent killing webservers, then we don't use it in the main post.
get with it! =)

Re:Coral cache

[realdpk]

The last half dozen coral links I've used, for slashdotted articles and non-slashdotted articles, have been basically down or so extremely slow as to be not worthwhile.

So, this means

[jdreed1024]

... I can watch my old Betamax tapes again? Good, I hate Congress interfering with my video formats. Next thing you know, they'll make DVD+R illegal, and only DVD-R formats will be allowed!

No, seriously, they could have chosen a better name. "Save Betamax" doesn't mean shit to Joe Consumer (How many people actually remember that decision?). If you phrase it as "They're going to make it illegal to set your VCR to tape a show while you're away on vacation", that'll mean a lot more, although it would be a crappy domain name. But I'll be calling anyway, and you all should too. Write letters to the editors of your local papers,while you're at it.

Re:So, this means

[nicholasbs]

How about Save the iPod?

The Free Culture student movement is already running just that campaign: SaveTheiPod.com

We've also launched a continuation of the campaign here: SaveThe.org

So check out those sites, and then go to FreeCulture.org and join the international student movement for free culture.

(If it isn't already abundantly clear, I'm part of the movement.)

What This Actually Means

[danger_boy_13]

For those of you who don't want to read the decision or Downhill Battle's site, the Betamax decision is what basically allowed us the technology of DVD/CD burners, tape recorders, and VCR's (along with possibly P2P networks) by saying that, just because some people are using them (VCR's at the time) to participate in illegal activities (copying copyrighted movies or shows), the technology itself is not the culprit. Therefore, the technology is legal. This is a vital decision for the technological world and a good thing to get involved in if you can.

Re:Write-in Day?

[Anonymous Coward]

Canned faxes, letters, etc. are more likely to get tossed and ignored than a personal call or letter.

Re:Finally!

[MightyYar]

RTFA. :) It's a phone-in campaign. Unless he also works the phones, the sysadmin will not notice.

No one's listening.

[hotspotbloc]

I'm sorry and hope I'm wrong but IMO they're not going to listen. They didn't listen to us over the PATRIOT Act, Carnivore, electronic voting or the DMCA. The politicians will pay a little lip service to the media saying they're "still investigating" the bill in question and haven't made up their minds while in reality they've already cast their lot to the highest bidder.

Let's face it: the politicians stopped listening to their constituents a long time ago.

If I may quote the great FZ from "The Meek Shall Inherit Nothing":

You say yer life's a bum deal
'N yer up against the wall ...
Well, people, you ain't even got no kinda
Deal at all
'Cause what they do
In Washington
They just takes care of NUMBER ONE
An' NUMBER ONE ain't YOU
You ain't even NUMBER TWO

Re:Finally!

[Jordy]

What is really annoying is that this Act is supported by Barbara Boxer (California Democrat). For some reason California's Senators are extremely anti-tech industry and yet they keep getting elected. The movie/music industry is big, but it doesn't hold a candle to the tech/consumer electronics industries in CA.

I just don't get it. I hope we do slashdot them. Heck, you can hit the EFF Action Center and faxslashdot them.

Re:Actually Beta is quite Popular

[chill]

Almost, not quite. Beta and BetaMax are two different animals.

Beta was Sony's commercial endeavour and it was quite the hit, as you are claiming. BetaMax was the related, but different physical tape, consumer attempt that died a horrid death.

Re:Not too worried - I live in a free country

[synergy3000]

Not too worried? How far behind do you think Canada will be if the US adopts this law? They will be next up for the corporate money machines. They money machines already have their power there in Canada.

wrong wrong wrong wrong!!!

[TheHonestTruth]

Jeebus cripes are you wrong. Judges look to intent vs. results all the time. The Yick Wo case is an example where the intent of the law wasn't to discriminate against Chinese laundromats, but the defendant in the case was freed because the law was being used exactly for that. In fact, since all law is public policy in some form or another, the courts always look to the intent of the law when deciding a case. Did this guy commit a murder? The jury says "yes." Well the law says I can give him 20 - life. Given that the object of the law is to deter people from committing these crimes, and though this is a terrible crime, it does not rise to the level of cutting him up and eating him. I will give the defendant X years... etc, etc.

Regardless if the INDUCE Act will be used or judged this way, to say that judges don't look to the intent of the law they are weighing the facts against is just ignorant.

-truth

Re:wrong wrong wrong wrong!!!

[Anonymous Coward]

While you are right that judges look at intent v. results all the time, Yick Wo in a very bad example of what you're talking about. The intent of the ordinance was to discriminate against Chinese laundromats, which is evidenced by the fact that the board of supervisors that drafted the ordinance proceeded to use it to discriminate against Chinese laundromats. The defendant was freed not because of any issue relating to intent but, rather, because the law was being applied in a discriminatory fashion in violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment.

Otherwise your post is spot on.

Lettered

[TurtleQ]

This article didn't cause me to signup, but it did induce me to compose a letter to my local congressman independently. Seems like if we all do a little bit...