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.
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.
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").