Slashdot Mirror
FCC Commissioner Wants To Push For DRM
RareButSeriousSideEffects writes "Techdirt reports that 'Newest Commissioner Deborah Tate has apparently announced that while she knows its outside the FCC's authority, she's a huge fan of copy protection and hopes to use her new position as a "bully pulpit" on the topic.'"
Power corrupts. That's all there is to it. Add money from corrupt companies in (I'm looking at you RIAA), and it's a recipe for disaster to everyone but those with power and money. Even then, those people may find themselves regretting their decisions.
DRM doesn't prevent piracy. It just takes our rights.
Which is easier:
A) Buying a copy of a song on iTunes with a mediocre bitrate, many limits, and incompatible with most players, or
B) Downloading a copy in an extremely high bitrate, in a format that many players use?
DRM drives people to piracy, it doesn't prevent it. Songs I buy in iTunes can't be played, for example, when I plug my iPod in my Xbox 360. MP3s can. Burning it to CD and ripping is lossy, and the bitrate is so-so. If I buy the song, shouldn't I be entitled to a copy I can play on many devices?
People download MP3's because their versatile, not free.
This is a link to a story on a blog that consists of a link to a story on another blog that doesn't cite any sources. This is an interesting way to create a news story, but I can't figure out how to tag it. "metablogging" came to mind, but that doesn't really seem to sum it up very well. Can anybody think of something better?
I have seen the future, and it is inconvenient.
It's troubling when someone with no apparent business background and understanding of technology to the depth necessary to grasp what DRM has done and will do gets a bully pulpit this high and this visible. I don't know one of the referenced articles is accurate in describing how Ms. Tate love for DRM really is a result of:
Apparently, her love of country music has brought her to this studied position
but, "love of country music" seems anemic justification and mostly a non sequitur in justifying something of magnitude DRM.
To be fair, the quote is based on an article about this on the Technology Liberation Front web site:
Last night a FCC commissioner came out in favor of...DRM? Yes, at a reception sponsored by the DC Bar Association in her honor, Commissioner Deborah Taylor Tate, the newest addition to the FCC, spoke eloquently on a number of issues but perhaps most remarkable was her advocacy for strong copyright protections. Hailing from The Music City, Nashville, this former Tennessee Regulatory Commissioner proclaimed her love for country music and the artists that wish to use DRM to protect their content.
Of course, this is just her personal opinion. However her position on the FCC lends it credibility it wouldn't ordinarily have. I don't know her tech credentials, but I doubt she's on top of the whole subject and is just espousing a knee-jerk reaction based on the usual political babble. She's probably a frustrated country artist at heart. Anyway, she's so obsucre as government people go, I doubt her promotion of DRM is going to create a groundswell of public support anytime soon.
GetOuttaMySpace - The Anti-Social Network
Oh god no. That is exactly how they want you to think. She will act as a powerful persuasion tool on the senate and house and be looked upon as an "expert" by the braindead morons running our country.
She is highly dangerous and only public outrage, and many MANY calls for her resignation will be an acceptable solution.
Unfortunately getting tech people as a group to do anything is like herding cats. It's just not possible.
If the FCC recieved tens of thousands of angry letters about it as well as the senate and house represenatives recieve angry letters as to her views to tear down fair use and americans rights they will stand back and take notice.
But nothing will happen which is a giant signal to them that amercians and Tech people want DRM desperately.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
Right. Because the market has never had a bad idea forced on it by legislation. Did the "market" decide that it wanted the DMCA?
Athletic Scholarships to universities make as much sense as academic scholarships to sports teams.
I think she should be kept in office precisely for her ill-advised comment. Anyone who makes such an assertion is better than their replacement-- who will likely have the same opinion but not be foolish as to state it. Heck, she just gave opponents of DRM ammunition to lobby against any bullying she does, and she's forewarned them of her agenda.
When in doubt, keep the noisy idiot over the cunning schemer.
A.
Does power corrupt or does power attract the corruptible?
Help Brendan pay off his student loans
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
That's sort of a "chicken and the egg" question, but I think that those who actively seek power are of two casts generally:
1) Those who want the leverage to change the world in a way that they couldn't accomplish without power.
2) Those who want to benefit themselves in a way that they couldn't accomplish without power.
In many cases, the line between the two is very fine since most people believe that what will benefit them will benefit society in general. It's what you do when you know they're in conflict that defines your character and your ability to recognize they're in conflict that defines your wisdom.
If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").