Slashdot Mirror
NCC Calls for Laws to Protect User Rights
earthlingpink writes "We're used to reading articles about new and creative ways in which DRM and other such technologies can be used to prevent us from doing whatever we like with our media. The BBC offers us a glimmer of hope with a story about how the National Consumer Council (NCC) has made a report to a parliamentary inquiry in which it has highlighted the issues faced by many of us. From the article: 'Consumers face security risks to their equipment, limitations on their use of products, poor information when purchasing products and unfair contract terms.'"
Given how big business has subverted the Democratic process, expect those who proposed this to be quietly removed from office...
Big business comes directly out of the democratic process. Whenever you give 51% of the people control over the individual's freedom, you can expect there to be abuse.
Our country was never intended to be democratic -- our Congress and our Executive branches were to be strictly limited in scope and in power. They had no ability to abuse the individual just because the voting majority said to.
I don't trust democracy. It doesn't surprise me that laws are written to help the elite few at the expense of the many. If I offered you US$1 billion if you worked 40 hours a week for 2 years, would you take it? If I told you I'd put a gun to your head and take US$3 out of your pocket a year for 2 years, would you fight it?
US$3 per person x 300 million people = US$1 billion. A lobbiest that works 40 hours a week has reason to fight for his billion, while you have little reason to fight against giving up US$3 for him.
Democracy is evil, support Unanimocracy!
Things you can do to prevent DRM:
1. Not buy from people who use it, an alternitive should be available.
2. Sell products without DRM
3. Not illegally share media
4. Vote for guys who are against it.
Other Ideas would be helpful
Interesting post. Had I mod points, I'd mod you up.I think the US founding fathers agreed about democracy. In a pure democracy 51% (actually 50% +1) can decree the execution of the other 49%. During the Peloponnesian War the citizens of Athens democratically voted to put all the men on one island to death & enslave the rest. Happily, it reversed itself in time to stop the mass murder. Democracy in action.
If you want your life to be different, live it differently.
All we can do is veto such products and make it known to the bands that the DRM their company placed on the CD are hurting their sales.
I'd love to get some of the latest CD, but, with the copy protected emblem on the back and saying it may not actually work on pretty much any device makes me keep my money.
Laws would be nice, but it wouldn't surprise me if the industry fought such a thing all the way to the high courts. Being told what to do would be such a culture shock for the industry :)
That's an awfully large sweeping statement. As China is proving day after day, there's nothing inherent about Capitalism that prevents non-democratic entities from participating--and competing well even.
Big Business only needs a predictable legal climate (barring that, guns -- lots of guns). Capitalism != big business, OTOH. Capitalism is about entrpreneurship and/or innovation and reaping the profits of your time/monetary investment. Unsurprisingly, democratic countries like India, while poorer, fare better in providing opportunities for their citizens compared to China, where one needs a work permit to work in Shanghai even if one's a Chinese national (and these work permits are doled out very stingily). And China mostly competes on wage arbitrage and efficiencies of scale (and yes, Chinese workers have far better living conditions than many Chinese farmers), it's not like it's doing anything stunning in the world of business. If Europe (say) got its head out of its regulatory ass, it could probably compete as well with China. But then you have the pesky 40 hour workweek (no matter that many European factory workers would have willingly worked 44-48 hours a week (as they do in Britain) to keep their jobs instead of being outsourced to Asia) and things like clean air laws (which are nice, I admit, but it does keep Europe uncompetitve w.r.t. Asia -- and unlike the US, the EU's politically correct 'save the environment' messsages fall on deaf ears in Asia).
You're confusing China's foreign-investment driven coastal skyscrapers and the ubiquitous Made in China Walmart items for success in capitalism. In reality, China's economy has problematic fundamentals (astonishing levels of loan defaults and a banking system in tatters, to name but two). The lack of transparency will cover it for some time (just like the USSR covered up their tanking economy from the late 70s to the 80s) but without drastic action from the Chinese govt the truth would have come out years ago. Of course, one reason China's so big on foreign investment is that it's determined to not let the USSR's fate befall them: they will continue to shore up their image with foreign investor money, and the foreign investors will keep giving as long as Beijing keeps telling them that their money is welcome.
Go somewhere random
That's an awfully large sweeping statement. As China is proving day after day, there's nothing inherent about Capitalism that prevents non-democratic entities from participating--and competing well even.
Which is why I love capitalism -- everyone has a chance at competing. In cartel mercantilism (what the US is), there are very high costs to entering many markets.
Look no further than the trolls and GNAA idiots on Slashdot for the reason why. A properly dispersed, obstructionist minority could send the entire system in to a paralysis.
Not in a unanimocracy, actually. The GNAA idiot in your community can do whatever he wants on his property, but he can't get everyone in your community to agree with his practice. The same is true for the nut job that wants Social Security -- he could continue to bring the bill to the election, but if the community doesn't want to throw moeny into a pot to be spent willy-nilly, the law won't pass. Try revoking failed social security today. Can't be done, even if 51% of the people hate it. I bet in reality far more than 51% of Americans hate Social Security.
I'm no expert, but I would pin the problem on a few specific things such as: the lack of congressional term limits (and the rise of professional politicians), the emergence of telecommunications media, the lack of transparency and accountability within public corporations, and the lack of more stringent restrictions on campaign contributions.
I'm sorry, but you're wrong.
The problem with our government is their unlimited power. The money came after the corrupt people came after the power was set up in an unlimited fashion.
I want unlimited campaign finance -- let anyone give money to anyone. To me, spending money is how I can express myself. If you let unlimited money come in, third parties would have a bigger voice and you could use money to vote in the free market. How do you control unlimited finance? By having completely limited power in office. If the Congress was restricted to their Constitutionally limited power (VERY limited powers), no one would want to bribe them with any amount of campaign finance -- they have no power to help others financially.
All the things you ask for are tyrannical and prevent me from doing what I want to do. You have no reason to deal with public companies -- stop buying from them if they lie about their books or their products. Don't force them to disclose anything. Also stop funding them with taxpayer dollars or taxpayer-granted monopolies such as copyright, patents and other monopolist powers that should never be granted in the first place.
Terms of a contract strike you as unfair? Don't agree to it!
Two counterpoints, if I may.
First, most DRM encrusted products that are purchased by the consumer(cd's, DVD's, etc.) do not have the "contract" (EULA) printed on the case. So the consumer is usually not aware of this "contract" until it pops up on their screen after purchasing and opening the product.
Second, most big box stores (Best Buy, Circuit City, Walmart, etc.) have a policy that does not allow consumers to return opened items of the types that are most commonly afflicted with DRM software.
So a consumer can easliy find themselves in the position of purchasing a product and not being able to use it if they will not accept the terms of the "contract" being offered, but they cannot return the product because the store will not accept returns on opened items of this type. It is not so much the "contract" itself that is the issue, but the conditions under which the "contract" is offered.
Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the (supposed) good of its victims may be the most oppressive