Senate Bill May Ban Streaming MP3s
Silverhammer writes "According to the EFF, a new Senate bill (S. 2644) sponsored by Senators Feinstein (D-CA) and Graham (R-SC) would effectively ban streaming MP3 for licensed music by requireing 'casters to use the most restrictive streaming format available (e.g., Windows Media or Real) rather than simply the most restrictive features of a chosen streaming format (e.g., Shoutcast or streaming MP3)." From the article: "The PERFORM Act would ... requir[e] webcasters to use DRM that restricts the recording of webcasts. That means no more MP3 streams if you rely on the statutory license. Under the bill, the statutory license would only be available to a webcaster if: [114(d)(2)(C)(vi)] the transmitting entity takes no affirmative steps to authorize, enable, cause or induce the making of a copy or phonorecord by or for the transmission recipient and uses technology that is reasonably available, technologically feasible, and economically reasonable to prevent the making of copies or phonorecords embodying the transmission in whole or in part, except for reasonable recording as defined in this subsection."
A spirit of bipartisanship bridges the right and left in harmonious accord!
*puke*
But the war on drugs and the war on terrorism are just a front and are used for other things like the war on privacy.
I gave the bat commader a high five.
I'm surprised we haven't yet had a war on piracy.
It's not a war, it's a "police action."
And it's one, two three, what are we fightin' for?
Don't ask me I don't give damn
We hate mp3s and spam
KFG
In the words of Louis Black: "This is Congress doing the people's work. The people's stupid, stupid work.
When people say "special interests", they usually mean a relatively small set of people with a disproportionate amount of power for one reason or another. Sometimes it's because they have a whole lot of money to be used in campaign donations. Sometimes it's a group that one party or another feels beholden to (the religious right, Latinos, nationalists, labor) for ideological reasons, even where that group isn't necessarily a majority (or even the majority of the majority), where solidarity outweighs the group's overall interest.
Geographically, power in the US Congress is not evenly divided. Bills begin in committees; committee members (and especially chairs) have considerable ability to quash or modify bills. Amendments to bills are difficult to remove. Especially in some committees, a single Congressman can effectively hold an entire house of Congress to the special interests of his or her constituents.
A substantial rewrite of the rules of Congress might help, but they're not happening any time soon (because the present rules always benefit the party in power). So some "special interests" will continue to have more power than their voting numbers suggest, and so the term "special interest" will continue to have a pejorative connotation.
Not a problem. MTV doesn't play music anymore.
The problem isn't the senators. It's the industries that *own* them.
Slashdot.. where people join together in deliberate ignorance.
Don't you mean the war on drug users and suspicious arabs?
Because let's face it, when all the money in the world fails to make a difference, you're approaching the problem the wrong way.
Thought: are Americans more or less likely to die at the hands of terrorists after our invasion of Iraq? With over 2,000 dead, and thousands more left injured, the current situation is basically a complete disaster. And angering millions in the Arab world makes us a bigger target. Face it, you can't scare people who are willing to die, period.
Thought: should being "high" be illegal if being "drunk" is not? Because certainly a compelling case could be made to prohibit alcohol because of drunken driving, violence, accidents, and abuse potential. More so than marijuana, even. But alcohol prohibition in the 1920s was a failure because it didn't curb demand, yet created crime to fuel an underground market, just like with the war on drugs today. But for prohibition to be repealed, people had to talk openly about the problem. Hard to do that with drugs, because the government misrepresents the facts to demonize drugs.
Obligatory: Law Enforcement Against Prohibition, 15 minute video: http://leap.cc/audiovideo/LEAPpromo.htm
America needs a change of direction, and honesty in politics.
As far as I know global temperature has been climbing since pirate populations have been declining. In fact I know that global temperatures are rising. It must be the pirates.
:x