Slashdot Mirror
Sony Settlement Start of DRM Protection Act?
An anonymous reader writes "Sony BMG and a group of class action lawyers have reached a provisional
settlement in the U.S. Sony rootkit class actions. Sony will
pay cash compensation and give away free downloads from a choice of
music download services including Apple iTunes as part of the
deal. The settlement includes a host of restrictions on future
Sony DRM use, which Michael
Geist argues provides the starting point for a future Digital
Rights Management Protection Act."
entire concept of a "EULA," for those few who don't know, is largely an obnoxious legal fiction - sans UCITA, anyway)
This is a love letter to Sony, and a "go ahead" signal to expand "open season on your computer" into the entire market. It is a shocking, audacious outrage, and I have no doubt Sony et al would love to see it made the basis for future statute.
Ladies and gentlemen, this is it. We have to immediately mobilize and derail this "settlement."
This is not settled until Sony repairs each vandalized computer... and then we can talk punitive damages...
Tired of Political Trolls? Opt Out!
This is for the New York case only. What about the Texas case brought by the Attorney General of TX?
There are lots of cases against Sony. This is only one of them.
Haha! Michael Geist is a cut-up. When I first read the topic I thought, "Damn straight it does, Michael! You tell 'em." Then I RTFA'ed and I realized he's saying this opens the door for a law protecting us from corporations.
Holy Dudley Do-Right, Michael! What country do you live in -- Canada?
This certainly does open up the door for a Digital Rights Management Protection Act. Here's how: Sony goes crying crocodile tears straight to Congress. It petitions every congressional representative in its pocket to draft a new law that indemnifies corporations from any damages resulting from software that gets installed on a customer's computer when he/she makes use of a company's product. Those same representatives, wiping their mouths, will get up on TV and proclaim to the world how this new legislation will protect us all from the frivolous lawsuits that are driving up the costs of everything, depriving Americans of their God-given low low prices.
Because this lawsuit against Sony only serves to point out the failures of our legal system, don't you see? Sony was trying to innovate with new technology and got slapped down by evil, profiteering lawyers. The corporations must be protected!
Breakfast served all day!
For real protection against egregious DRM, fair use rights must be protected. DRM isn't really about piracy prevention, after all - it's merely a red herring. If content companies were only interested in piracy prevention, the Blu-Ray spec would be finalized by now.
The real reason for DRM is control over the consumer, ranging from hardware or software lock-in to captive audience advertising. Fair use lets us escape such abuses by allowing us to time- and space-shift content, allowing us to move legally-purchased content to other playback devices and to skip unwanted advertising. The DMCRA would be a good start - if anything, this proposed DRMPA should be added to that legislation.
Besides, the complaints regarding Sony's DRM are the same as the complaints surrounding a lot of spyware and viruses. Why should Sony's status as a multibillion dollar corporation cause it to be painted with a different brush (and have different laws applied to it) than, say, Claria?
There's one problem at the root of all of this. And Sony's rootkit hijinx and crappy advertising techniques, Microsoft's monopolistic practices, and the despicable actions of dozens of other megalithic companies are all symptoms of it. Look at the common factor among all cases (size), and you'll see:
Modern justice lacks scalability.
Think about it. We have these immature, almost psychopathic corporate constructs wandering the landscape. They're greedy like children, live in their own world like children, and have an unnatural knack for breaking things like children. They're gigantic, amoral, know only enough to get into trouble, and don't think much about consequences. And why should they? In this case, it's taking a whole gaggle of government lawyers bearing class action suits to spank them, and even then they're doing a poor job of it. Admittedly, it might help if the government didn't dote over them so, tsking at them for running roughshod over their toys (customers), but ever so happy with them when they perform vital household duties like collecting information and marketing government policies.
The death penalty exists for individuals who are convicted of crimes. (Note: guilt never enters into it; the only important aspect is the conviction.) For corporations, legal contrivances that they are, the best the government can do is dissolution. The last time they did that was the breakup of Ma Bell, and we know what happened there: the individual enterprises have each grown up in their own special, horrid ways.
And the mallet needed to properly smack them down and make them stay down we can't trust in the government's hands. So how do you spank a toddler that big?
You cannot truly appreciate Dilbert until you read it in the original Klingon.