Slashdot Mirror


Anti-P2P Law Looms over the Horizon

Adrian Lopez writes "MIT's Technology Review has a piece by Eric Hellweg about pending legislation known as the Intellectual Property Protection Act. According to Hellweg, IPPA could make it illegal to skip past commercials and could 'criminalize the currently legal act of using the sharing capacity of iTunes, Apple's popular music software program.' More information on IPPA is available at the Public Knowledge website."

98 of 560 comments (clear)

  1. International? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The internet is international, how will this be enforcable?

    1. Re:International? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I don't think they really care about that. This is all about controlling consumer base in the "land of the free".

    2. Re:International? by krymsin01 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Why don't you ask the Chinese?

      --
      stuff
  2. lots of other victimless crimes to worry about. by grub · · Score: 4, Insightful


    Senator John McCain stated his opposition to this bill, and specifically cited the anti-commercial skipping feature: "Americans have been recording TV shows and fast-forwarding through commercials for 30 years," he said. "Do we really expect to throw people in jail in 2004 for behavior they've been engaged in for more than a quarter century?"

    Your jails are full of fellow citizens that dared to smoke pot. That "crime" has been on the books far, far longer Senator.

    --
    Trolling is a art,
    1. Re:lots of other victimless crimes to worry about. by genrader · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I believe if individual cities/counties/states wants to legalize public marijuana smoking, that's the local government's business. I think there should be fines for people smoking pot in public areas, particularly areas where people are going to be all the time (city streets, parks, etc.). However, I think whatever the fsck you want to do in your own home is your business. If someone wants to sit on their property and smoke pot all day, so be it unto them.

    2. Re:lots of other victimless crimes to worry about. by MrMr · · Score: 2, Funny

      well, I guess that now is the time to declare war on P2P networking.
      That'll put a stop to it.

    3. Re:lots of other victimless crimes to worry about. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting


      In the US there are more people in jail for marijuana related crimes than the entire prison population of 1970.

      Google for it.

    4. Re:lots of other victimless crimes to worry about. by gartogg · · Score: 5, Insightful

      OK, so I think that the entire idea is ridiculous, and spoke out against it. BUT: bypassing the networks sponsors is not QUITE a victimless crime, as the networks are losing money by it. I mean, it's fine to point out that the revenue model is outdated and will no longer work, or say that the advertisements should be moved to placements in the shows, but calling it victimless and comparing it to smoking pot is, well...

      I guess you could say it's typical of thinking on Slashdot. Never mind.

      --
      I'm a concientious .sig objector.
    5. Re:lots of other victimless crimes to worry about. by DAldredge · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Fast food and smoking also have very high health costs to 'society' so should they be made illegal too?

    6. Re:lots of other victimless crimes to worry about. by krymsin01 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Stupidity harms society. I'm not seeing anyone making that illegal.

      --
      stuff
    7. Re:lots of other victimless crimes to worry about. by CosmeticLobotamy · · Score: 5, Funny

      bypassing the networks sponsors is not QUITE a victimless crime, as the networks are losing money by it.

      And damn you if you don't read every ad in your newspaper. If people did, the paper would get paid more for them. You selfish bastards.

    8. Re:lots of other victimless crimes to worry about. by KontinMonet · · Score: 2, Insightful

      When laws against heroin were enacted, 1/4million people were made instant criminals, not because they were shooting up but because heroin was an ingredient in a lot of 'medical tinctures'. When prohibition was enacted, a majority of the population were affected. When anti-dope laws were enacted (as a tax initially) again, a majority were affected because, previously, farmers, clothes manufacturers, etc.etc. had been encouraged to grow hemp as it is an extremely versatile plant. It grew as a 'weed' and anybody with the weed on their land could have been arrested. It took a long time to eradicate.

      In all cases, citizens were going about their legal business only to be criminalised practically overnight. This process is not new.

      --
      Did he inhale?
    9. Re:lots of other victimless crimes to worry about. by Hatta · · Score: 4, Informative

      No, I'm sorry. I don't see dope smoking as a victimless crime. Society is a victim. Self is a victim.

      There may be some costs to society. But the costs of prohibition are even higher. Prohibition does not work, and it never did. It only creates a black market ruled by criminals to fill the demand for drugs that will always exist. Drug quality decreases, increasing overdoses and toxic reactions to contaminants. Then there's the huge cost of imprisoning all of those pot smokers who could have been contributing to society just like everyone else. Prohibition is BAD medicine. Like quicksilver for diahrrea, it causes more problems than it cures.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    10. Re:lots of other victimless crimes to worry about. by stratjakt · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Ah, unless you make it a "health concern".

      If I want to sit around and smoke weed all day, it is my business, and the government can't interfere. Until some "medicol doctar!!!1! kekeke!" diagnoses with me with a fancy new politically correct disease, now it's the governments duty to lock me up.

      We had the article yesterday about internet porn. Apparantly getting a hardon is a medical condition caused by "erototoxins". So no first amendment rights for internet porn! It's an addictive disease causing substance just like crack.

      Of course there are people engaged in self destructive behaviour who legitimately are mentally or physically ill. Our society as a whole doesn't have enough common sense to draw the line.

      So lets criminalize Big Macs and titties, bring back prohibition. Umm, lets see, what else do people enjoy. Puppies, kitties, etc..

      --
      I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
    11. Re:lots of other victimless crimes to worry about. by Bombcar · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yes, I agree. With one caveat. Society shouldn't have to pick up the tab. So if you smoke, and get cancer, you need to get treatment from your own health insurance, not from state supplied medical care.

      If you break an arm, it should be covered. If you have lung cancer from LA smog, you should be covered. But if you have lung cancer from choosing to smoke, it shouldn't. Society shouldn't prevent you from harming yourself, but it shouldn't pay for fixing you.

    12. Re:lots of other victimless crimes to worry about. by Asphalt · · Score: 3, Interesting
      I think the big dealers should be nailed, that's a given

      What do you have against Pfizer?

    13. Re:lots of other victimless crimes to worry about. by DAldredge · · Score: 2, Interesting

      What about cooking at home? Should I have to get a goverment permit and take a class to buy butter?

    14. Re:lots of other victimless crimes to worry about. by Ho-Lee-Cow! · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So this is extended to justify the criminalization of things like oral sex, because some psycho fundie believes you'll burn in Hell and that he has to protect you?

      Self as a victim is a lame ideology, only surpassed by doing things for the children.

      It's time for the US to get out of the business of regulating private behavior.

      --
      In space, no one can hear you moo.
    15. Re:lots of other victimless crimes to worry about. by DAldredge · · Score: 3, Insightful

      So, if I go to the bathroom during a commerical break I am now stealing?

      Perhaps you need to fully think that over.

    16. Re:lots of other victimless crimes to worry about. by metamatic · · Score: 2, Informative

      In fact, UK National Health Service statistics suggest that over the course of a lifetime, smokers cost society far less in healthcare costs, because they die so much sooner. If you're looking at things from the free market profitability angle, the best option is to encourage smokers to smoke more. Increased tax revenue, lowered health burden, and fewer idiots--there really is no downside.

      --
      GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
    17. Re:lots of other victimless crimes to worry about. by DAldredge · · Score: 3, Insightful

      He called it "not quite a victimless crime"

      It isn't a crime, or did I miss that law?

    18. Re:lots of other victimless crimes to worry about. by Tim+C · · Score: 2, Funny

      More's the pity...

    19. Re:lots of other victimless crimes to worry about. by ewilts · · Score: 4, Funny

      Not only is stupidity not illegal, it can frequently get you elected.

      --
      .../Ed
    20. Re:lots of other victimless crimes to worry about. by Pharmboy · · Score: 2, Informative

      Just for the record, very VERY few people actually go to jail for SMOKING pot in the US. Perhaps for a few hours to post bail, but most cities make you pay a fine, and even under the worst situation, its a years probation. Everywhere in the US, smoking pot is a misdomeanor, not a felony. Yes, the laws on pot are very stupid, but lets not blow it out of preportion.

      Now, federal sentencing guidelines REQUIRE that a person who GROWS pot (even a few plants) must get a 5 year minimum sentence, so remember, its better to support gangs and terrorists by purchasing pot rather than growing it... Yes, that has got to be the all time dumbest law on the books, but its still not mandated to go to jail for just smoking pot.

      --
      Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
    21. Re:lots of other victimless crimes to worry about. by iminplaya · · Score: 2, Insightful

      ...bypassing the networks sponsors is not QUITE a victimless crime...

      So far, it's not any kind of crime. Your statement could be taken to mean that if I don't buy a sponser's product, they lose money, therefore I should be forced to buy their product. There is no right to guaranteed profit. If their actual sales don't meet predictions, too bad. There's no crime in that. And just try to prove that I didn't but a product because I skipped their commercial. Though the ??AA might try to tell you different.

      --
      What?
  3. mcain is right by OffTheLip · · Score: 5, Insightful

    We have been fast forwarding through commercials for years. This legislation is a joke. Consumers are not required to read the ads in magazines or newspapers. I really see no difference.

    1. Re:mcain is right by ElDuderino44137 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The only difference is ...

      The times, they are a changing, and the cheese is a moving.

      In other words, markets are desperately trying to keep today exactly like yesterday.

      Cheers,
      -- The Dude

    2. Re:mcain is right by SuperficialRhyme · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Consumers are not required to read the ads in magazines or newspapers.

      Just wait until next year.

      I really see no difference.

      That'll be the arguement they use.

      I don't even know if I'm being insightful or funny (I hope funny!).

    3. Re:mcain is right by ad0gg · · Score: 3, Funny

      Wait till the law against using the bathroom during commercial.

      --

      Have you ever been to a turkish prison?

  4. Re:Legislation. by grub · · Score: 2, Informative


    Let's ignore our legislators

    That's not wise. Without uproar to counter these corporatism-driven laws you'll end up in jail for behaviour you thought legal. Ignorance is no excuse.

    --
    Trolling is a art,
  5. Enforcement? by Iftekhar25 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    How do they hope to enforce this law?

    1. Re:Enforcement? by siliconjunkie · · Score: 2, Interesting

      1. Connect to bittorrent tracker
      2. Determine that the .torrent in question points to protected intellectual property
      3. "netstat -an"
      4. Record all connetions to 6889
      5. Subpoena ISPs
      6. Litigate
      7. Rinse and repeat

    2. Re:Enforcement? by NoMoreNicksLeft · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Wrong.

      Do we have 35 million drug users in prison? No. Instead, they selectively send those they dislike the most to prison, and let the rest churn through misdemeanors in court, creating a large dsyfunctional rehab industry and a permanent underclass.

      The same will happen with IP infringement.

  6. WOW by jackb_guppy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    We are creating the old USSR, right here in America.

    We have lost parts of the 2nd, 4th, and 5th amendment. Bush's 2000 win gutted any of 10th that was left.

    The police can now search your home and "finincal" records with court oversite with informing you that it even happened and barring all from talking about it.

    So why does anyone think that removing Fast Forward button would not be another freedom lost?

    1. Re:WOW by Dun+Malg · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Bush's 2000 win gutted any of 10th that was left.

      Pfff! As if there was anything left of the tenth! Lincoln gutted it way back when, and FDR buried whatever was left. The feds usurping states' power was a done deal long ago.

      --
      If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
  7. I remember reading somewhere... by freedom_india · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...if Edison invents the lightbulb today; there would be atleast huge protests on 7 PM News by candle and gaslight makers union; atleast 3 lawmakers would speak against lightbulb and how it is dangerous due to its explosive nature; 10 states would pass laws banning usage of lightbulbs...

    --
    "Doing what i can, with what i have." ~ Burt Gummer
    1. Re:I remember reading somewhere... by midknight32 · · Score: 5, Funny

      The funny thing is that Edison did get involved in a huge commercial/patent war over the delivery of electricity with Westinghouse, who was using Tesla's AC power delivery system. one side effect was the invention of the electric chair, when Edison tried to "prove" that AC was deadlier.

    2. Re:I remember reading somewhere... by anethema · · Score: 3, Informative

      Dont forget edison had very little to do wiht the lightbulb other than its commercial promotion.

      I dont think any respected source could claim edison 'invented' the light bulb.

      More info HERE

      --


      It's easier to fight for one's principles than to live up to them.
  8. What's Next? by Malicious · · Score: 4, Funny

    Further along the horizon is legislation that will require all citizens to actually buy the products that the see advertised. Being exposed to an advertisement and not purchasing it is a breach of contract, punishable by large fines or death.

    --
    01101001001000000110000101101101001000000110001001 10000101110100011011010110000101101110
  9. Idea for a new slashdot section. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    We need some kind of bill-watch section. That way when this gets voted on, we can have an article saying which way it went. Most of the bills that are brought up on slashdot are totally forgotten about afterwards and never posted about again.

  10. Fast-Forward is the flamebait of the package. by johnjaydk · · Score: 5, Interesting
    I think we are missing an important part of the puzzle.

    The gameplan is: Lump some eight laws together in a package. Make one of them outrageous stupid. The stupid one gets all the flak, is pulled from the package and the rest sails straight trough congres.

    --
    TCAP-Abort
    1. Re:Fast-Forward is the flamebait of the package. by cpt+kangarooski · · Score: 2, Insightful

      But that's just the thing! The law that has everyone pissed off is actually about the only good one! It's all the others that we ought to be objecting to.

      So it's much more clever than you give them credit for.

      --
      -- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
    2. Re:Fast-Forward is the flamebait of the package. by glass_window · · Score: 2, Funny

      Yes, when they read this bill off, they should start by making a nice long lengthy advertisement for every corp. that sponsored this bill. Maybe they'll get the idea.

  11. Dammit by cpt+kangarooski · · Score: 5, Informative

    This is the third article on /. in a week that totally misreads the proposed addition to 17 USC 110.

    It does NOT make it illegal to skip commercials.

    It just says that this new exemption doesn't apply to skipping commercials. If there is an EXISTING exemption (or if the manner by which the commercials are skipped isn't even prima face infringement) then those still remain in effect just as they do now.

    This is little more than a clarification.

    That said, it is a bad bill overall, since there are a lot of other provisions attached with this one which suck, such as criminalizing copyright infringement even more than it is now, permitting the government to file civil suits for infringement, further gutting registration formalities, etc.

    But this is one of the only halfway decent parts of it -- as it would tend to remove any doubt as to the legality of what Clean Flicks has been doing, and would permit other creative uses of EDLs, such as to edit Jar Jar out of Star Wars movies -- and so it annoys me quite a lot to see people's outrage arising out of a misreading of the bill. Be outraged at the rest of the bill, dammit.

    --
    -- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
  12. far reaching consequences by diqmay · · Score: 3, Interesting

    While I understand Seantor McCain's remarks, I guess I wonder as how legislation would affect my right to disable images in websites and thus ignoring banners, or even using other software that does not render the ads at all? Does this mean I have to load and all website ads, lest I be judged a criminal, and if I scroll past an embedded add in an article does this mean I'm "fast forewarding" that add. This seems incredibly restrictive and amazingly unenforceable. Diq - spelling is no object

  13. National security is at stake! by Rattencremesuppe · · Score: 2, Funny
    From TFA:

    Jonathan Lamy, spokesperson for the RIAA: "(...) Intellectual property theft is a national security crime."

    Soon we'll see P2P users referred to as terrorists ;))

  14. Fascism by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Fascist corporate governments require consumers to consume their prescribed advertising. Every citizen is required to consume propaganda that innoculates against antisocial tendencies, like dissent, conservation, and critical thinking - or any thinking at all.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

  15. how? by nmec · · Score: 2, Funny

    How do they hope to enforce this law?

    Simple. the RIAA (just because they like to do these kinds of things) will dispatch a legal representative (and secretary [at your expense of course]) to each and every home with a VCR or DVD recorder, then whenever you fast-forward they will have the power to hand you a press-play-and-desist order. Failure to respond to this will result in the immediate seizure of your remote control, whereby the lawyer will tow your VCR to the impound and force you to make an over-inflated out-of-impound settlement.

    You don't think they haven't already thought this through?
  16. It will end up like the drugs industry... by Osrin · · Score: 2, Interesting

    ... here in the US we will be paying high prices to cover the creation of the intellectual property (R&D in drug company parlance) while the rest of the world gets to use the product for next to nothing.

    In fact, I predict that some countries will eventually start to complain about the cost of the bandwidth needed to enjoy all the free stuff that is out there.

  17. Keep it coming by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    This kind of legislation will only result in further crippling of the failing US economy. A once great economic empire will collapse under the weight of its own fear and paranoia. I say let it happen. It is just a form of Darwinism and it will allow burgeoning empires such as the EU to thrive.

  18. P2P is a "national security crime"?!? by AnalogDiehard · · Score: 5, Insightful
    "Intellectual property theft is a national security crime. It's appropriate that the fed dedicate resources to deter and prosecute IP theft."

    Whoa thar. Time out. Game penalty. Chill.

    The sharing of the Anarchist's Cookbook would be a national security issue. IP theft of weapons technology, air defense systems, domestic utility and transportation infrastructuce are national security issues.

    But P2P of ENTERTAINMENT is a "national security crime"?!?

    That's the most flawed stretch of reasoning I've ever seen. And I don't even engage in P2P.

    And if this bill becomes law and my fast forward button is outlawed,

    • then my DVD player goes in the trash and I will never buy another DVD again.

    It's a sad day when laws are passed to perpetuate outdated business models.

    --
    Eternity: will that be smoking, or non-smoking? I Corinthians 6:9-10
    1. Re:P2P is a "national security crime"?!? by WillDraven · · Score: 2, Informative
      The sharing of the Anarchist's Cookbook is free speech, but we already lost that right. I was expelled from middle school on the day after the Colombine shootings because several months ago I had brought a copy of the Anarchist's Cookbook to school on floppy disks and given it to another student (I was mainly interested in the old hacking stuff [ok, so maybe I made a bomb or two, but only in my back yard]). Later on the student I gave it to printed out some of the explosive recipes and brought them to school. When the administration found out we were both immediately expelled for the rest of the year. They seemed to forget that the other student and I were the entire tech crew for the drama dept. and we had a play the next day. We conveniently decided to take the disk with the light cues (that the actors were trained to react to) on it home with us. The only bomb that went off was the play. after threatening the school system with legal action they agreed to pass me on to the next grade, however I didn't receive credit for my highschool level courses i was in, causing me to repeat several classes which I subsequently failed due to lack of interest (come on, how many times can you take algebra and not just get completely sick of it?). I began skipping school very frequently and got heavily into drugs. Even though on the days I did come I would score 100%s on my tests, because of my horrible attendance and lack of homework being done I ended up resorting to dropping out and getting my GED. I'm now working my way through community college with no job (shitty economy.. thats a whole different rant however...). My quality of living is way below what it should be for someone of my intelligence. Every day I see more of our rights stripped away and I am powerless to do anything (can't vote, felon, again, a rant for another time..) I'm still mad. I think I always will be until something changes drastically in our govt. (or we get a completely new one). Dont lay down and let the government run over us anymore.

      Sincerely,
      Another Victim of America.

      --
      This is my sig. There are many like it but this one is mine.
    2. Re:P2P is a "national security crime"?!? by goon+america · · Score: 2, Informative
      But P2P of ENTERTAINMENT is a "national security crime"?!?

      You're making a common mistake: imputing human characteristics such as shame on lawmakers. It's called "anthropomorphism." Don't feel bad, some people even make this mistake for lobbyists.

      Seriously though, they've been using this excuse ever since it became an excuse. Just look at what else they're trying to do this week:
      Citing national security concerns, some Republican members of Congress are trying to limit the personal financial information that top federal officials must disclose.

      Tucked within the House's 497-page version of the "9/11 Recommendations Implementation Act" is a provision to repeal the requirement that senior-level officials report their personal financial assets valued at more than $2.5 million. It also would end the practice of disclosing the dates of stock transactions.

      The proposal to limit financial disclosures initially covered only top-level intelligence officials. It was recently expanded to include all executive branch officials, according to a draft version of the bill.
      link

      I, for one, feel safer already. There is a certain safety, that is, in watching the slow erosion of your system of government and knowing there isn't much you can do about it. There is, indeed, a sense of safety in helplessness.
  19. We may very well see TV forced into being more by antifoidulus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    interactive. The biggest losers in the whole TiVo thing have to be scripted pre-recorded shows. News shows quickly lose a lot of their value after they are aired. Aside from a few select games, almost all sports shows lose their value after the game is over, the only shows that don't are shows such as sitcoms etc.
    Hopefully, people will see the insanity of this law and not pass it, which will mean that the distribution methods for scripted shows will either have to evolve or die. I personally hope they evolve into distributing the shows directly to the public via an iTunes like service. That way I no longer have to pay for cable just to see the few shows that I enjoy; I can purchase them directly. The producers of these shows no longer have to be encumbered by the increasingly draconian regulations of the FCC. Just imagine what South Park could do if they weren't worried about being fined.

  20. First convict lining up by dantheman82 · · Score: 4, Funny

    OK, I'm going to record an MP3 reading of the Intellectual Property Protection Act (all 200,000 pages) and intersperse commercials in support of the bill throughout the MP3. I will share it on my network (there's no place like http://127.0.0.1) and present you with a dilemma. You can stream the reading off my network and break one part of the legislation. Or, you can choose not to listen and thus disregard my commercials and break another part of the legistlation. Don't worry, it's not supposed to make sense, unless your IQ is less than the average Hollywood filmmaker.

    --
    This sig donated to Pater. Long live /.
  21. Well, it is Slashdot... by adjuster · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ...so I can't expect anybody actually went and read the fucking article. Here's the Gooogle cache for the article at Public Knowledge. Take a minute and read it.

    Once again, the intellectual property cartels are lobbying thru legislation that seeks to further limit and erode the rights of consumers. We all seem to be laboring under the idiotic assumption that the current system is "just how things are". Copyright and patent protection comes from the People, and is a social contract. This contract is supposed to benefit both parties-- the creators of intellectual property and the People.

    Write your Senator. Vote. Make intellectual property a campaign issue for future elections. Tell other people about how their rights are being taken away and encourage them to do the same.

    --
    The Attitude Adjuster, I hate me, you can too.
  22. I'm soooo scared by ScooterBill · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I remember the former Soviet Union outlawed all sorts of things. Did it stop people? No, it just pissed them off until...well we all know what happened.

    I have to chuckle everytime I see a law or technology attempt to suppress the desires of the people. First we had Napster, then Kazaa, now Bittorrent. The geeks will always win.

    Now what worries me is the effects of all this in the interim. The message of freedom being spread throughout the world is spoken by those who consistently attempt to pass laws controlling what we can and can't do.

    If you're Exxon, you'll get an exemption for pollution. If you're Joe Blow, you'll get put in jail for fast forwarding through a commercial. What's wrong with this picture?

    1. Re:I'm soooo scared by Hatta · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I remember the former Soviet Union outlawed all sorts of things. Did it stop people? No, it just pissed them off until...well we all know what happened.

      What? Stalin's purges? Yeah, we're screwed.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
  23. Need more organizations involved by Free_Trial_Thinking · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I'm a little concerned that the EFF and other groups like downhillbattle.org are not helping organize opposition to this bill.
    It's common knowledge that the government is slow and us internet folk are fast. Yet here we are seeing the opposite, the government is being fast, and freedom organizations of the internet are slow to pick up the fight.

    Perhaps this suggests groups like EFF, et al need to re-examine how they react to legistlative bills. Not to sound over-dramatic, but I think they need an "army" of concerned citizens ready to start calling/writing their legistlators within 24 hours notice. Sort of like the minute-men of the American revolutionary war. Perhaps we even need a figuritive watch-tower to monitor congress and catch these bills in the very earliest stages.

    In the bigger picture I'm an optimist and I hope to see over the next few years that the internet will help people get organized and bring strong pressure to bear on governments. We see how powerful the open-source model is, I'm waiting to see a similar phenomenom with politics. We see beginings of this with the Dean campaign and things like Groklaw but again I'm hoping this is just the begining.

    I just wish there were more I could do personally.

    --

  24. I'm just too tough for you. by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 4, Informative

    No, propaganda is more than just "information" - it is information designed to create specific actions, through perpetuation of a specific image of reality, in which the included information is true, and associated with the selected action. The actual accuracy of the information, the appropriateness of the associated reaction, and the consistency of any of the propaganda with the real world, or the rest of the consumer's worldview, is immaterial, except as a design problem to be solved. That is one reason the Spanish word for "advertisements" is "propagandas" - its information delivered as a tool for modifying behavior. The technique is most successful when referencing an encompassing worldview, implicitly or explicitly - whether fascism, communism, consumerism, environmentalism, or any other belief system.

    Fascism is corporate government. Usually politically controlling the people through fear, backed by application of force. It also usually includes arbitrary bigotry, to harness mass consciousness in the service of the new worldview behavior mechanisms: "Jews must be destroyed, so Germans must join the army", or "Gays must be cured of their sins, so Americans must elect Bush". Fascism is not just manipulation of information, strong words arguing points of action through connotations. Fascists aren't the only assholes. Fascism is very specific, though fascists are usually skilled as cryptofascists, hiding when it suits them. Fascists are masters of media, and much more insightful in the workings of the mass mind, which is innoculated and brainwashed every day in the mass media, without needing to strap individuals into chairs for psychohypnotic trance therapies and subliminal programming. That's what late-night TV is for.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

    1. Re:I'm just too tough for you. by ratamacue · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Fascism is corporate government ... backed by application of force

      There couldn't possibly be a government that doesn't operate on the principle of force. A voluntary government wouldn't be government -- that would be free enterprise.

      Does McDonald's posess the right to initiate force as a means to an end?

      Force is the fundamental difference between government and everyone else. Government is the organization which holds the unique "right" to initiate force as a means to an end. Others may use force in self-defense (where it is still legal), but any private individual or group who initiates force is a criminal.

  25. Business as usual by maximilln · · Score: 5, Interesting

    First let's examine where the Feds think they derive the authority to even debate these issues. It probably comes from Article 1, Section 8, Clause 8,"To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries."

    Note that the language includes "promote the progress". It does not include provisions for deterring competition. Note also that the language includes "authors and inventors" and makes no provision for the corporate empires which manage to back authors and inventors into a financial corner to induce them to sign away all ownership.

    As always, without anything in the Constitution to specifically address P2P, fast-forwarding of commercials, or regulation of content and viewing, we must defer to the 10th Amendment,"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people."

    To preempt those communists in the crowd who would like to interpolate their favorite part of the Constitution to include their pet issue of the week I would like to remind everyone of Amendment 9,"The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."

    So, there you have it. As always our federal politicians are wasting our taxpayer money debating issues which they have no authority, responsibility, or legal jurisdiction over. As always they will come up with mandates which will tax us further, hamper manufacturers, and prevent the consumers from getting what we pay for.

    Don't blame me. I didn't vote for any of the current politicians. I also do more than my fair share attempting to educate those who don't have any clue what real freedom or liberty is.

    Bring on the trolls.

    --
    +++ATHZ 99:5:80
  26. Re:Lots of other [...] crimes to worry about. by Hatta · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There's a local 25 year old teacher who will no longer teach because someone high on drugs crossed the centerline and hit her head on.

    Driving impaired is wrong, whether it's due to drugs, fatigue, or talking on a cellphone. You're not suggesting we ban cell phones entirely just becuase they cause some accidents. Why should pot be any different? Keep in mind that a little benadryl impairs driving more than Cannabis.

    --
    Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
  27. Re:Lots of other [...] crimes to worry about. by DAldredge · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Members of my family have been killed by drunk drivers, yet I do not blame the drink I blame the person who drank too much then got behind the wheel.

    This blaming the tool/object for the actions of humans is completely and totally stupid.

  28. Re:Firefox Adblock? by Stevyn · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It also sounds like the world is coming to an end in 8 days if you listen to the crazy guy shouting on the street corner. I'll take both with a grain of salt.

  29. Had Enough? by slam+smith · · Score: 3, Insightful
    I realize that this hasn't passed yet, but you got to ask yourself. Have I had enough of big government yet? As long as the majority of citizens keep saying "There ought to be a law". We will continue to have these problems. A law needs to be more a last resort and not a first.

    A law against murder. Sounds great


    A law against burglary. Good idea


    A law against smoking pot. Now we are pushing it. If you are going after the DWI aspect of it, sure, otherwise... (Though on a personal morality basis I think it's wrong. I really don't believe I should impose my views in a personal arena like this. Because of course what is to prevent someone else doing the same to me when they are in the majority.)


    A law against fast forwarding through commercials. Ok senator, the good people of your state think you need to look for a new line of work

  30. weird stuff by latroM · · Score: 4, Informative

    from wipo.int: Intellectual property refers to creations of the mind: inventions, literary and artistic works, and symbols, names, images, and designs used in commerce.

    "Intellectual property theft is a national security crime. It's appropriate that the fed dedicate resources to deter and prosecute IP theft."

    Since when were you able to steal "creations of the mind"? I don't like this word game which intends to make copying stuff morally relative to stealing. If you are against corporations tightening the copyright law, don't use the term "intellectual property". The word "property" distorts and oversimplifies the whole idea.

  31. Letter to my senator by ortholattice · · Score: 4, Informative
    I wrote a letter to my senator. May I suggest others do the same.

    People ought to be asking themselves, seriously, a much broader question: Should Congress to be passing laws that the majority of people don't want? A case can be made for such laws in the case of individual rights of minorities. But I don't see that a corporation merits any consideration whatsoever with respect to any law that restricts our freedom.

  32. Real life commercial watching by gad_zuki! · · Score: 5, Interesting

    As a Tivo owner I have a special perspective on commercials.

    When Im forced to use a "hostile television" I notice a few things:

    1. THe SAME commercial gets played over and over. I was watching the Simpsons and Malcolm in the Middle live and saw the same truck commercial five or six times. Same with the rest. So skipping something you've seen is hardly costing anyone money.

    2. Commercials have zero information quantity. That is to say they are all emotion and no logic. Whats the MPG of that truck? What is its safety ratings? I dunno, all I know is a busty woman is leaning on it on a backdrop of some colorado mountain scene with a flag somewhere on the screen. Or as Dr. Rappielle says "It appeals to the reptilian brain." I'm not a reptile and I like making informed consumer decisions (usually).

    I guess the term "victim" here is what is being debated. A market shift to different modes of operation isn't victimizing its the future! Its why we have free markets. So companies can adapt. The old advertisers will be replaced with the new.

    1. Re:Real life commercial watching by AvitarX · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You obviously missed the part about how millions of truck beds are abused every day, and you need to buy a Tacoma to stock truck bed abuse, because it has some special lining.

      Almost every add has something informational in it. Such as MPG ot safty rating. It's just the truck add of which you were speaking was about the liner.

      I would take a ban on commercial skipping if in exchange there was also a ban on network IDs that take up 20% of the screen, and make loud noises over quite talking at key points in the show. If people keep skipping adds we will get big banner adds on TV and it will piss me off far more then commercials, that is not a revenue model I want.

      I do have a Tivo at home, and skip the commercials, so it's not as if I like them, it is just that I prefer them to what is slowly inching it;s way into the shows themself.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    2. Re:Real life commercial watching by jZnat · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Give this man a medal; he is 100% correct. I usually don't mind seeing a commerical once in my life (generally applies to commercials about things I fucking care about), but I have seen on many occassions the shittiest quality commercials possible, and they would be repeated multiple times in one commercial break. After seeing an ad for Girls Gone Wild: I Hate You, Dad! edition for the umpteenth time while watching Comedy Central, I don't think that will influence me, a 16-year-old computer, videogame, and electrical stuff nerd to buy the softest of softcore porn when I can get much better things for free (welcome to t3h intarw3b).

      Besides, the only people who are generally positively affected by commercials are the dumbasses, so why don't they just have commercials during things like reality shows or the news? Networks and advertisers wouldn't even notice a difference in profit by doing that.

      I rarely watch TV now as ads plague it more than they do Gamespot or IGN. At least I have Adblock for those; I don't have the money or time to build my own PVR and use those fun OSS programs that filter commercials and such for me.

      --
      'Yes, firefox is indeed greater than women. Can women block pops up for you? No. Can Firefox show you naked women? Yes.'
    3. Re:Real life commercial watching by mdielmann · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So skipping something you've seen is hardly costing anyone money.

      You've clearly underestimated the power of repitition.
      You've clearly underestimated the power of repitition.
      YOU'VE CLEARLY UNDERESTIMATED THE POWER OF REPITITION!

      Sure, it may not work on everyone, but it works on a lot of people. It's just like memorization, but they want us to remember that truck, not someone else's.

      --
      Sure I'm paranoid, but am I paranoid enough?
    4. Re:Real life commercial watching by Eskarel · · Score: 2, Insightful
      The problem with your analysis is that you(along with every single web advertiser in the entire universe) have forgotten what makes advertising work.

      The purpose of advertising is not to cause you to immediately buy a product. Its purpose is to increase your desire for a certain type of product and far more importantly to make it so that when you start looking for that type of product, you think of them first. To do this they need to repeat the ad enough times to get it into your subconscious.

      Now personally, I like pretty much every other man on the face of the planet, channel surf during tv commercials, I don't really enjoy watching them, but they are nice to have since they allow me to go check my dinner, go to the bathroom, or in general take a break from the tv.

      That said, I'd like to make a quick point about radio broadcasts, and to a lesser extent tv, and say I'd rather listen to one ad every few songs than 15 minutes of back to back ads every hour or so.

    5. Re:Real life commercial watching by OldManAndTheC++ · · Score: 2, Insightful
      1. THe SAME commercial gets played over and over. I was watching the Simpsons and Malcolm in the Middle live and saw the same truck commercial five or six times. Same with the rest. So skipping something you've seen is hardly costing anyone money.

      Repetition is the whole idea. The advertiser wants to pummel your psyche with the same image, repeated over and over, until it registers with your unconscious mind. Years of advertising experience has proven the effectiveness of this technique, even with those of us who think that we are unaffected. So yes, advertisers believe that they are losing money if you screen out repeated ads.

      Car and truck ads are the best example of the effectiveness of repetition, because consumers purchase them infrequently. Repeating the brand name reinforces the image in the consumer's mind, so that when he is ready to buy a car or truck, he has already accepted the value of the brand. Advertisers have a LOT of money invested in promoting their brands. Just look at the recent sale of the Altoids and Life Savers brands to Wrigley - they paid 1.5 BILLION dollars for brand names. They are not going to sit quietly while consumers try to wall themselves off from ads.

      2. Commercials have zero information quantity. That is to say they are all emotion and no logic. Whats the MPG of that truck? What is its safety ratings? I dunno, all I know is a busty woman is leaning on it on a backdrop of some colorado mountain scene with a flag somewhere on the screen. Or as Dr. Rappielle says "It appeals to the reptilian brain." I'm not a reptile and I like making informed consumer decisions (usually).

      You might not be a reptile, but your brain doesn't know that :)

      Don't get me wrong. I hate advertising and avoid it whenever possible. It is a $75 billion dollar industry in the U.S. - wouldn't it be great if that money could instead be used to do something worthwhile!

      --
      Soylent Green is peoplicious!
  33. Ditch the TV. by Alioth · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It's quite simple - vote with your wallet; get rid of the TV.
    The Internet is far more interesting than television anyway.

    1. Re:Ditch the TV. by CGP314 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Hey! You there with the pop-up blocker! You're next buddy.


      -Colin

  34. Re:Lots of other [...] crimes to worry about. by Hatta · · Score: 5, Informative
    The difference with impared driving caused by recreational drugs is that the user doesn't ususally know about the imparement status - or thinks that it's either okay or possible to get away with.

    The foregoing comparisons might be misleading. THC's effects differ qualitatively from many other drugs, especially alcohol. For example, subjects drive faster after drinking alcohol and slower after smoking marijuana (Hansteen et al., 1976/ Casswell, 1979; Peck et al., 1986; Smiley et al., 1987).. Moreover, the simulator study by Ellingstad et al. (1973) showed that subjects under the influence of marijuana were less likely to engage in overtaking maneuvers, whereas those under the influence of alcohol showed the opposite tendency. Very importantly, our city driving study showed that drivers who drank alcohol over-estimated their performance quality whereas those who smoked marijuana under-estimated it. Perhaps as a consequence, the former invested no special effort for accomplishing the task whereas the latter did, and successfully. This evidence strongly suggests that alcohol encourages risky driving whereas THC encourages greater caution, at least in experiments. Another way THC seems to differ qualitatively from many other drugs is that the former users seem better able to compensate for its adverse effects while driving under the influence.


    From a 1993 DOT report, my emphasis. Besides, many many many people take benadryl without knowing it affects driving as much or more than alcohol. Please note that this is not an endorsement of driving stoned.

    In addition, the drugs don't exactly have any real purpose aside from personal recreation

    So? In a free country we should be free to persue what ever recreation we want.

    There's also a bit more practical reason to illegalize pot usage in public places - just consider it to be the equivalent of a public smoking ban. People can still do it in their own homes, but it will work better than just considering it a criminally restricted substance.

    I can see the paralell, but I'd be opposed to a public cigarrette ban too. I can understand banning smoking inside public (government) buildings. But in the open air, and in private (including places of business) buildings I see no possible justification. What could be less harmful to society than me lying by the river on a sunny day puffing a joint and reading a book?
    --
    Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
  35. I remember an old documentary by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 3, Interesting
    It was about a school somewhere in america, I think New York but am just guessing. The story was about the increased occurence of private companies subsidising parts of a school in exchange for advertising.

    This has been an issue for a long time around the world and every single time it is done the powers that be insure us that it will not go out of control.

    lucky for the dutch we are several years behind the rest of the world so if we want to see the future we take a ticket to the US of A.

    Far from the cafeteria being run by McD or books on economy being printed by Wall Street the docu saw a far far worse case.

    Students were made to watch simple commercials on tv. Don't watch the commercials and you can't attend classes.

    So for those worried about ordinary tv forcing you to watch commercials, you are a bit slow. Far worse has already been tried.

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

  36. American Dream coming true by presarioD · · Score: 2, Insightful



    Fascism at the Gates and 60M people voted for it, cheered their guts out for it, celebrated it!

    How much more can the american people take before they say it's too much? Well let the wheel of history roll and stick around.

    It is unpatriotic to skip commercials, unpatriotic and criminal to think out of the box, unpatriotic and criminal to criticize the government.

    The day is coming that I'll buy a one way ticket out of here!

    Sheeesh, why all young democracies have to slide through fascism before they reach maturity?

    --
    Yam, yam, uga booga, yam, yam, yade, yade, uga booga, yam, yam, yade, yade
    1. Re:American Dream coming true by presarioD · · Score: 3, Insightful



      I have a theory! I believe in the United States the citizens are not the humans but the corporations. The humans are the flora and fauna that grows in the society. The real citizens are the corporations. They vote (with their money), they have rights but no obligations, they have access to legislation, they participate in the society, they sent the flora and fauna to die on endless wars while they (the corporations) profit out of it!

      Sad...

      --
      Yam, yam, uga booga, yam, yam, yade, yade, uga booga, yam, yam, yade, yade
  37. Write your legislators! by El+Bromo · · Score: 3, Insightful
    We here on Slashdot tend to be too cynical, too willing to accept the fact that bad laws will be passed and there's nothing we can do about it. We need to write to our elected officials and let them know how we feel. We can actually help make a difference on issues if we simply take out a few minutes to let our feelings be known.

    Teddy Roosevelt once said: "A vote is like a rifle: its usefulness depends upon the character of the user." So, make your letters well-written, well-reasoned arguments combined with impassioned pleas for your senator or representative to listen to logic, instead of a hate-filled diatribe as to why these bills are the root of all evil and they are just part of the machine dragging us further and further downward. Otherwise, we'll all be bystanders as this entire class of legislation is forced upon us.

  38. P2P is not bad by gone.fishing · · Score: 4, Interesting

    P2P is a tool, like a saw, a hammer or yes, even a gun. Don't blame the tool when some human uses it in a wrong way. Over the years many tools have been used to commit crimes - even the lowly rock can be used to murder.

    It seems to me that history would teach us that when a popular activity is outlawed, that activity doesn't go away it moves underground. Look at the roaring 20's and the temperance movement that caused prohibition. Outlawing alcohol didn't make it go away, it just drove it underground and made common criminals wealthy and willing to protect their enterprise with guns and a little enterprise called "Murder Inc."

    A similar corelation can be made with illicit drugs today; Crack, crank, heroin, and pot are all available on street corners in every major city! Those gangsters also protect thier illicit interests with guns and murder.

    One has to wonder if the drug situation were dealt with a little differently, if things wouldn't be better? Please note I am not being pro-drug here. But I have to wonder if cocaine and other drugs were available to adults in controlled stores if we wouldn't have less crime and about the same number of adicts? If that was the case, wouldn't it be a success? Our prisons would be less crowded and we would probably have less crime.

    By now some of you are thinking I'm a lunatic, that P2P software is different from drugs. Please believe me when I say I understand that. But regulation brings with it unanticipated and often disasterous consiquences. It makes criminals out of otherwise law abiding citizens and, it puts the country that regulates it at a competitive disadvantage to the countries that don't. All in all, I see this kind of conservitive over regulation as a "bad thing."

    Also, FTP can and frequently is used "peer to peer," so are IM programs: Are all of these going to be legislated away because of some short-sighted law? Is this really appropriate legislation - aren't there already plenty of laws that address copyright violations? I can't see how true American's can't agree!

  39. Petition by ksaville00 · · Score: 2

    I know how much everyone hates them, but I made one anyway. To sign it in opposition to this bill the url is: http://www.petitiononline.com/StopIPPA/petition.ht ml/

  40. It's looking inevitable now... by The+Master+Control+P · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This is just one more stupid thing that may or may not be added to the unbelievable Rube Goldbergian catastrophe-waiting-to-happen that is the American legal code. Something's going to give soon. Frankly, there are probably SOOOO many mutually contradictory laws on the books by now that it's virtually impossible to not be a criminal somehow.

    The inefficiency, corruption, and general incompetence of the American government is at the moment staggering. And it is happening because we the people have let it happen. Say what you will, this government is still absolutely bound to the will of the people because we can vote it out of office come every two years.

    The problem is that the American people are becoming apathetic and uncaring. Nixon irretrievably broke the faith of millions in their government. Even if they hear about these bullshit bills, they have no idea what to do and form their opinion soley around what the magic picture box says.

    And do you know what the problem is? We're allowed to escape basic education without even being able to recite our nation's founding documents. Twelve, thirteen years of schooling before high school graduation. We were never required to so much as read the Constutition or the Declaration of Independence.

    Personally, I think it's an outrage that the founding documents of our nation aren't required reading in every single high school in the nation. Being able to recite the first two articles of the Declaration, the meaning of the first ten amendments, and being able to enumerate in no unspecific terms the powers of all three branches of Government set forth in the Constitution should be a requirement for high school graduation.

    And you can make that possible. Obviously, there are certain politicians don't want you to read material that tells you that it's your duty to rebel against an unjust government and that all rights not specifically granted to the Federal government are reserved by the states or the people, but if the people create enough of an outcry and vote out representatives who oppose it, it will happen if only because the remaining representatives will act out of self-preservation. And note that I didn't say ALL politicians. Heck, I've got a copy of the Constitution in front of me that was sent by my representative in the House.

    Now stop staring at the screen. Go out there and make a ruckus.

  41. H.R. 4077 Establishes the National Tree (Oak) by LionKimbro · · Score: 4, Funny

    Check out the full text of H.R. 4077, the one that says: "To enhance criminal enforcement of the copyright laws, to educate the public about the application of copyright law to the Internet, and for other purposes." ...in the abstract.

    Okay, now: skip all the text, and jump right to the bottom- "TITLE II--MISCELLANEOUS." Section 201, the designation of national tree.

    "The tree genus Quercus, commonly known as the oak tree, is the national tree."

    Can someone more informed in the ways of law tell me what this is all about?

    1. Re:H.R. 4077 Establishes the National Tree (Oak) by wk633 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      It's a lot easier to add a rider to an existing bill you think will pass, than to write a new one.

      It also creates all sorts of back-room deal making. Basically, "I'll vote for your bill if you add this pork for my local constituancy". It'a also why attack ads can say "So and so voted against mothers and apple pie!". What they really voted against was some other thing the bill, the "mom and applie pie" was added on.

      It's really really stupid, and it's very American.

  42. This doesn't really scare me by petrus4 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    They're going to criminalise P2P, are they? Interesting...Software piracy has been a crime for probably as long as I've been alive, yet I don't see IRC carrying warez movement going anywhere any time soon. The problem for WIPO and the rest of the associated idiots is that such laws are largely unenforceable...possibly 5%-20% of the people involved in such activities are prosecuted, tops.

    These laws are utterly futile...and they are futile for several reasons. For one thing, they are completely dehumanising...they are counter to human nature and human desire. For another, because they are largely unenforceable, they rely on the laughable expectation that they will be willingly obeyed.

    As I've said earlier, we keep getting more and more evidence that we are now genuinely in the Aquarian era, and it ain't going to be how the song from that stupid musical Hair described it. Initially anyway, we are in for a period of truly mammoth conflict. Uranus and Saturn, or to use imagery which people are more familiar with...the elderly vs the young and the new...Science, intellectualism, altruism, and the desire for genuine freedom colliding with tyranny, willful ignorance and stupidity, commercialism and fear...Smith vs Neo.

    Unfortunately for Ashcroft, Hatch, Vilenti and the other Smith wannabes of the world however, although they may do some damage in the short term, long term they don't have a prayer of getting anywhere with their ambitions. They're too stupid, too greedy, too fearful, and therefore largely self-defeating. At times I pity them, because if they could learn to change their own mindset and behaviour they also could benefit from the future that the rest of us are busy creating.

    If you step in chewing gum, it will cause your shoes to stick to the ground to a minor degree, but not ultimately enough to cause you anything more than inconvenience. Also, despite how tenacious said chewing gum may be in remaining on the soles of your shoes, it can and will be eventually scraped off...and then you continue walking. Humanity is still going to ultimately get where it wants to go...Bush and his friends might try and set up roadblocks, as have other such individuals throughout history...but ultimately all they amount to are potholes.

  43. Banning commercial skipping by nasta · · Score: 2

    How is this going to be enforced? They can always require manufacturers to build in some sort of commercial skipping protection in appliances sold in the US but the rest of the world does not have to have the same rules as US has (I know, it sucks, but that is the reality ;-)

    Now, this will create the same situation as with DVD zone locks... with a few clicks with the remote and you have disabled this 'consumer requested feature' that we all need to have!

    Why create laws that are not enforcable and that the citicens laugh at?

    --
    This space 4 rent!

  44. This bill should be passed. by nusratt · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Well, OK, it shouldn't, but I'm hoping that it does, with all of the most absurd and excessive provisions retained.

    A deplorably large portion of the public is oblivious to what's been happening in the IP wars.
    It's about time that something happens to wake them up, to get them to take these issues personally.

    I think that passage of this law would have the beneficial effect of causing wide-spread public disregard and contempt of such laws (and their promoters), as happened with the 1920s Prohibition-era attempt to ban alcoholic beverages.

    For a quite a while, I've harbored a fantasy of organizing a mass demonstration in Washington, during which the participants stand in front of the Capitol and Justice buildings (and IP lobbyists' offices), collectively engaging in open violation of IP laws which are enforceable only by massive and embarassing government over-reaction --
    e.g., playing hand-held PVRs and skipping the commercials, using encrypted WiFi to exchange files bearing names of copyrighted works, etc. --
    i.e., massive civil disobedience.

    I'm hopeful that this law would also have the effect of opening the eyes of the masses to corporatist corruption of the legislators who support such bills.

  45. Trade blocks by jesterzog · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The internet is international, how will this be enforcable?

    It won't be too difficult. The standard thing that the US does in this situation is to say "implement our laws or we won't trade with you, we'll tell everyone else not to trade with you, and we'll make it even more difficult for your citizens to travel via or into the US".

    It's surprisingly effective, because they only need to actually have it enforced in western countries, and such countries typically rely on trade with the US either directly or indirectly.

    It's really not so surprising that corporates (most obviously Microsoft) get away with what they do in the US, because the Federal Government leads by example. The essential foreign policy of the United States is to use its power/monopoly in one region to lock everyone else out of another region.

    Having said this, I come from a smaller nation (New Zealand) that has decided to not support the US on several occasions, including various nuclear issues and the Iraq invasion. The result is that our government is now pursuing a Free Trade Agreement with China, because the US won't speak to us. I'm not sure which is worse.

    We are comparitively lucky in many ways out here, though. I won't forget that.

  46. Burn everything. by rice_burners_suck · · Score: 2, Interesting

    No no no no no... They should call this the INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY FREEDOM ACT. It will make it ILLEGAL to create, possess, use, traffic in, or otherwise have anything to do with intellectual property in any form. It will be the LAW that every intellectual property in existance must be DESTROYED. Books will be burned in huge bonfires. Same thing with paintings, music and movie recordings, film, software, documentation, and even people, because their brains contain intellectual property. When there is NO intellectual property in existance, there will no longer be any piracy, and then the problem will be SOLVED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11111111111

  47. Re:Lame Duck Humanity. by plog · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "Maybe we need to ask ourselves why we engage in such useless behaviours"

    I grew up watching squirrels and robins get stinkin' drunk off the crabapple tree droppings out back... drunken or stoned deer have nearly suicided on my truck numerous times (mushroom season)... all kinds of examples of drunk and disorderly animal behaviour, from all parts of the globe.

    Get over your puritanical impulses. Getting blotto is part of being animal, like most of our behaviour. More, it's part of the fundamental nature of mysticism, and thus at the root of all religions. Revelations was written under the influence of fasting visions, for instance; wherever we inquire into the great mysteries, we employ techniques to help us get closer. Sometimes those techniques involve chemicals.

    Then there's Carnival, as an impulse, not an actual festival. We need to party, and if we really want to party well, we need to forget who we are. Being blotto is fun, and like any medicine, when dosage is respected, it's good clean fun with a probable adaptive benefit.

    Turning fun and religious stuff into vice means there's despair, opression, and profit involved. Focus on the substance just results in displacement; you're attacking symptoms. Try dealing with the despair and profit end of things, and the rest will settle down.

  48. Will There Be a United States in 2006? by MichaelCrawford · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Reading this article, and also about how internet porn is more addictive than crack, it makes me think that somehow the USA is going to collapse in on itself before we have the opportunity to elect our next president.

    My country has so many problems, so many terrible problems that really deserve attention from legislators. Is the fact that some people skip commercials while watching TV one of those problems?

    --
    Request your free CD of my piano music.
  49. Idea for a new slashdot [Legal] section by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Well I made a couple suggestions awhile back. One markup the bills XML style. Two use RSS to let people know that a new bill is coming up.

    And last since this is a copyright story. Here's a book to read.

    Patent, Copyright, & Trademark: An Intellectual Property* Desk Reference by Attorneys Stephen Elias and Richard Stim. 7th edition.

    *Note to audiance, two attorneys using the term "property". Read and find out why.

  50. Locked down like this because of the internet? by DroopyStonx · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Perhaps the internet was the beginning of the end.

    They don't like people having all this access to information.

    Now legislation created BECAUSE of the internet is leaking over into real life (can't ff commercials).

    Please.

    This country is fucked, and so are the people in it.

    They expect me to respect copyright laws when they turn around and create this bullshit? Hahaha no. Sorry, doesn't work like that. Stuff like this makes me download even MORE.

    --
    We have secretly replaced these Slashdot mods' sense of humor with a rusty nail. Let's see if they notice!!
  51. Freedom of Speech by PingPongBoy · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It's nice to bask in the right to express oneself freely, but those who want to enjoy free works of art should either contribute high quality art for free or buy the copyrights.

    Clearly technology will make copying easier. Technology will hamper the ability of people to profit from their own creativity. The time will come when computers produce better compilations of knowledge and art than people. At this point information may as well be free because I can click on the button labelled "Create" and receive a dump of information that I can enjoy.

    I suggest that we stop using P2P for mere sharing of files that "someone has copied/ripped from somewhere" - especially data that was originally sold rather than freely distributed. P2P is somewhat corrupting, leading to laziness. Instead, consider the success of the free software movement where cooperation produces quality material available at no charge. The time has come for technology to assist us in the production of free art. Look at the incredible special effects done in movies by computers. Well, we can apply worldwide grid computing to rendering free movies, as well as other noble applications such as scientific calculations.

    You can bet that prices for data will drop in the years to come. P2P is a bizarre phenomenon meant for surreptitious file copying - if information was to be made available with no qualms, it would be on a website. Valuable information with heavy traffic is mirrored legitimately. If you have the right to freedom of speech, put your money where your mouth is, and output some free stuff for us.

    --
    Know your pads. One time pad: good for cryptography. Two timing pad: where to take your mistress.
  52. isn't this the whole internet? by john_uy · · Score: 2, Interesting

    making p2p illegal is like making the internet illegal? i mean the internet now does transfer files to one another whether be it html, gif, jpg, mp3, wmv, etc. my question would be what is the differentiating factor for this case?

    --
    Live your life each day as if it was your last.
  53. WRITE YOUR CONGRESSMAN by ClioCJS · · Score: 2, Informative
    http://www.publicknowledge.org/action/IPPA2391

    Stop debating about it here. DO SOMETHING. Write your congressman. NOW.

    --
    -Clio
    Karma: Bad (mostly from not giving a fuck)
    Blog: http://clintjcl.wordpress.com