Slashdot Mirror
Audio Broadcast Flag Introduced in Congress
Declan McCullagh writes "We found out in mid-2004 that the RIAA was lobbying the FCC for an audio version of the broadcast flag. But because a federal appeals court slapped down the FCC's video version last year, the RIAA needs to seek formal authorization from Congress. That process finally began today when the audio flag bill was introduced. It would hand the FCC the power to set standards and regulate digital and satellite radio receivers, and RIAA Chairman Mitch Bainwol says it strikes "a balance that's good for the music, good for the fans, and good for business." The text of the bill is available online."
The first 25 dolts to reply generally haven't even read the bill.
The current equipment will NOT be made obsolete.
They framed this in a manner that was interesting. Why are they talking about licensing and fees in law? That makes very little sense. Copyright law already covers who can copy it and who can't.
This law is really only about the "flag". And how that flag functions is NOT going to be up to the consumer. A consumer, wanting to make a copy of something they purchased, is NOT going to run out and buy a "license" before they make a copy.
However, I really do question the opponents to this law. You may pay for the right to watch your cable on demand and listen to your music. But you don't have the right to tape them, at least not last time I checked. I'm fairly certain movies aren't shown on TV and Cable to allow people a chance to record them and keep them. That may be unintended side affect of the current law. It was never the purpose.
Why is a broadcast flag bad? You don't OWN the material that's being beamed into your house, any more than you own a movie that you happened to go see in a theater. We all know where the legalities stand on taking a camcorder into a theater, don't we?