Slashdot Mirror
Congress Asks Universities To Curb Piracy
The Illegal Subset of the Integers writes "According to Ars Technica, Congress has sent letters to 19 universities identified by the RIAA and MPAA as havens for copyright infringement. In it, they not only seek to discover what these universities are doing to dissuade students from infringing activities, but give the implied threat. House Judiciary Committee member Lamar Smith (R-TX) was quoted as saying, 'If we do not receive acceptable answers, Congress will be forced to act.'
One wonders, though, what the universities are supposed to do when international disrespect for imaginary property rights is so widespread that there are currently over two million hits on Google for a certain oft-posted illegal number, up from the three hundred thousand hits from sometime yesterday."
University students ask Congress to shorten copyright terms.
The students at University will often end up in Software Development, Law, Arts etc.. they know what they are doing. Students don't have the spare cash that employed people have.
there is nothing imaginery about the fact that if you work for years producing some digital content, you have the right to decide what to charge for it. The fact that a lot of people willfully ignore the law and take what isn't there's anyway does not make the property rights 'imaginery' any mroe than the preponderence of people breaking the speed limit makes the speed limit imaginery either.
I guess the submitter would prefer it if the whole concept of copyright and IP did not exist, but I wouldn't get your hopes up for any new movies, TV, music, softwre or games in that case.
I wish all the people moaning about the fact that 99% of entertainment content is commercially produced and requires payment would stop moaning and just produce some free content instead. Could it be that its way easier to complain about the content produced by other people than it is to actually contribute anything yourself?
On behalf of universities everywhere, I'd like to ask Congress to stop being the RIAA and MPAA's bitch.
The HJC has no business being a mouthpiece of the MAFIAA.
The fact that such corruption is now being done so openly highlights how bankrupt our public institutions have become. This is going to end in civil war.
I personally think they should go for option (2). I mean, many universities are already going that route. For example, MIT course material is being made avaiable via Open CourseWare. Also, many academics are pushing for open access to all academic publications.
So, really, given that universities are supposed to be (and frequently are) institutions dedicated to dissemination of information, free speech, intellectual progress, and radical ideas... isn't it entirely consistent with the ethos (even their mandate) to not act as enforcers of copyright law? (Note: I'm not claiming that the universities have to actively encourage copyright infringement, merely suggesting that it is not their role in society to enforce those laws, even on their own campuses.)
From the blurb: ... there are currently over two million hits on Google for a certain oft-posted illegal number...
Tell me: how can a number be illegal? What if they had used a normal word as the key, would that word then suddenly be illegal?
-- Cheers!
The right to have the right to say how something you own is used is an imagenary right?
No one is stopping them from putting a fence around a concert and charging people an admission fee. But going after the people listening in the parking lot is over the top.
We can tape music from radio, and we can record programs on tv with a VCR. What the fuck is the difference between that and downloading a song? There is NO DIFFERENCE.
This is a battle for the control of YOUR COMPUTER, not "intellectual property". And THEY are winning, what with DRM and "Trusted Computing", etc.
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
Really it's a privledge granted by the people.
It can be taken away by the people as well.
There are a lot of very good and strong arguments for not ahving copyright.
Personally, I thin a limited copyright is a good thing, but for about 14 yaers. Longer then that then you give power to corporations to dictate your culture.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
I'm so tired of watching congress protect the corporations from the people. It's supposed to be the other way around!
It's wonderful to know that what with nuclear proliferation, thousands of Americans dead in Iraq (not to mention the hundreds of thousands of Iraqis), a President that insists on a millitary "carte blanche" despite his downwardly spiraled track record, international tension at its highest levels since the Cold War, and the highest fuel prices the world has ever seen (with no alternative in sight), it's wonderful to know that the US government has time for the really IMPORTANT issues.
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
Haven for piracy?
Did that mean they didn't volunteer to hand over private data of their students to the RIAA when asked?
If that is the definition of a haven for piracy, then I want to attend those schools.
http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
And thats that. And apparently RIAA rules united states, not "the people".
Lamar Smith (R-TX)
Read radical news here
"Judiciary Committee member Lamar Smith (R-TX) was quoted as saying, 'If we do not receive acceptable answers, Congress will be forced to act.'"
What the schools should say:
'Here's what we're doing to curb piracy: we respond to subpoenas signed by a judge to their full extent. We remove infringing content that has been identified by its owner in full compliance with the DMCA.
Oh, you wanted us to do your job for you? Don't think so.
So, it looks like this a bi-partisan effort to do the MPAA/RIAA bidding. Gee, isn't it great when the representatives of the two parties can put aside their ideological differences and work together being complete whores to monied interests?
Unspoken is the fact that up to a generation ago, universities did just that. Universities have recently seen an opportunity to monetize their innovation and defray growing costs. There still has not been sufficient public debate about the law and ethics surrounding publicly-financed institutions patenting, licensing and in some cases directly capitalizing IP developed with public funds, often explicitly funded by DAPRA, NIH, etc.
illegitimii non ingravare
add this to the list of ways the RIAA/MPAA try to stop P2P but actually end up pissing off its own customers. You know, if they spent half the time and resources they do in their witch hunts on a education/PR campaign they would have much better results. Instead of using FUD, educated the people on what they are doing and what it constitutes. Downloading a CD from thePirateBay is stealing, but copying a CD you bought is not. Draw some lines, let them be known, and maintain your image while still fighting your fight. Probably to late for that now though... oh well...
Invexi - a Phoenix, AZ based web design and web development company.
Yes, it is imaginary because they don't own anything. Copyright is attempted theft with government backing. It exists for the sole benefit of an industry of entrenched interests. The artist is frequently left holding the bag. They shall get paid when they perform, just like the rest of us peons. They deserve no special privileges. They are welcome to use their organizations to promote their work and upcoming events, not to make law and claim authority they wouldn't have without the bribing of government officials and the might of the police and the military.
What?
in one corner, grumpy old men who simply don't understand the full ramifications of the internet, issuing law after law after law
in another corner, technically astute, highly motivated, media loving, and most of all, poor teenagers
it doesn't matter what some corporation thinks is right and wrong. it doesn't matter what out of touch with reality laws a bought and sold congress passes. it doesn't matter how huge their financial war chest. it doesn't matter how large their army of lawyer whores. it doesn't matter, it doesn't matter
what matters is what is going to happen, and what is already happening. events now surrounding media and the law and internet seem to have an air of inevitability about them to me. time will simply take care of the details, but the ending in sight seems fixed and immutable: unenforceable and universally ignored and shortcircuited intellectual property laws. a colossal joke. for better? for worse? who knows. but inevitably so
riaa, mpaa, dmca, etc. used to infuriate me. now i am more sanguine about events. because i don't see how history can be changed, how the genie can go back in the bottle. some old grumpy men simply do not get what is happening, and never will. and the only solution is to let them die off. and so they will. and so time will take care of this problem
people who get into legal incriminations and moral hysterics about the inevitable unstoppable alterations the internet is making to media and the law just put me to sleep now: they simply don't matter anymore, and they are the only ones who don't realize that. let the dinosaurs die, and simply avoid the swings of the old dumb lizard's faltering weakening tail. let time take it's toll on those with minds too brittle and sight too dim to adapt to the new reality. the new reality: the full ramifications of media on the internet and what it fully means for society and companies and how media is produced and consumed
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Can it be any clearer to average Americans; Government will allow all your hands-on, technical, dirty, manual, but well-paying jobs go to other countries without hardly a gasp, but fight tooth-and-nail to protect an elite few who own, run, and work in the movie industry. An industry that cannot possibly own all mindshare as globalization continues, a pointless industry that actually produces nothing long-lasting, bankable, and advanced(like a pyramid or a profitable niche industry; just fake sets and technology), an industry that captures, monopolizes, and narrows popular culture draining away money and attention from local venues and real talent, an industry that simply cannot support all Americans.
Ownership of a thing is nothing more than a legally enforceable power to control what other people do with regard to something. Ownership of a copyright is no more "imaginary" than ownership of a stock, ownership of land, or ownership of a hand tool.
The same argument has been made of property more generally, and is no more true in the narrower case of copyright than the more general case.
No, it doesn't. Though, of course, many of the details of copyright law serve various industries of entrenched interests.
whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
Why not just cut to the chase and put the MPAA/RIAA in charge of the entire country? I mean they need a test ground before we can trust them to rule the world, otherwise it would just be irresponsible of us! Courts are so bothersome and expensive, why use them at all?
The university administrations should say a polite "Thank you for your letter" and file it in the round filing cabinet.
Why should universities be under any more of an obligation to stop copyright infringement than any other ISP?
my sig's at the bottom of the page.
> Tell me: how can a number be illegal?
:(
Under the DMCA "trafficking" provisions, they're claiming that the 09 F9 number you've seen if you read Slashdot is part of an illegal circumvention device. Never mind the fact that it's totally useless without some complex software I doubt most of us have a copy of (I sure don't). The one bit of good news is that the DMCA is a US law. The bad news is that the US has a bad habit of "exporting" bad laws and enforcing them against people like Dmitri Skylarov who aren't even US nationals when they get the chance.
> What if they had used a normal word as the key, would that word then suddenly be illegal?
You seem to be under the mistaken impression that the law has to make sense. I sincerely wish that were true, but we live in a world where courts have declared that tomatoes are vegetables, even though botanists insist they are technically fruits.
My non-lawyer, uninformed guess would be that they wouldn't sue you for using the word itself, but for letting people know that it happened to be the key to whatever, just like they've nailed people for posting links to sites if it was clear they knew there was illegal content there, even though the people in question weren't distributing anything illegal. The irony being that they most likely included the very same "illegal" links in their own legal filings and on the court records.
No sir, I'm sorry, but I think you'll find that the laws are written by highly imperfect beings and interpreted by judges who do their best to make due with a lot of self-contradictory rules and flawed legal principles.
In short, yes, they really can write laws and make rulings that make no sense whatsoever, that contradict incontrovertible facts, and which are self-contradictory. It doesn't make sense. It never has made sense. But, alas, it does happen
Actually, I would, because I find laws on drinking age and (certain) recreational drugs as unjust as current copyright laws, as do many in acadamia and acadamia admin. All of these issues are a matter of separating "fair/reasonable/moderate" use from abuse. The analogy from a university standpoint is quite apt (I am involved in such institutions and have seen many cycles of this go though).
Ah, you are distinguishing between civil and criminal proceedings. Point taken... the universities should be, and should be permitted to be, more protective of students facing civil issues that criminal ones. Unfortunately, it will come down to protecting school reputations, and congress can apply pressure, one way or the other.
Did you ask them? You can you know.
In fact, I did. Lacking the wherewithal to contribute thousands of dollars to PACs and candidates however, I think my requests largely fall on deaf ears.
>To curb the bullshit.
Congress is a product of the people. People in general need to curb the bullshit, that includes things such as assuming its okay to download music in lieu of buying a CD and saying stuff such as 'imaginary property rights.' One group of morons is feeding the other. If people actually believed in free culture they would only consume free items. RIAA artists want you to pay them. Posting keys isnt some glamorous civil-rights disobedience its saying "Dude, now I can totally download more hollywood crap now and act righteous!"
The those of us outside this system of big-budget movies and music and those who steal it and the lawmakers trying to figure it out, its either funny or pathetic depending on our moods.
...to extend copyright every time Mickey Mouse is at risk of becoming public domain.
Blar.
1) Dealing the the Iraq war
2) Dealing with the Afghanistan war
3) Dealing the the swelling public debt
4) Dealing with poverty in america
5) Dealing with the issue of healthcare
and so on...
Um, I can. Property rights exist in things that are tangible physical objects (tangible personal property and realty) and in things that are not (stocks, debts, etc., as well as the subjects of intellectual property.)
Property rights are merely legally enforceable powers. Exactly what parameters they have vary based on the subject of the rights, to be sure, but that doesn't make property rights in any one class of subject any more "imaginary" than any other.
And no one is arguing against that position, either, so why are you bringing it up?
There are certainly definitions of "stealing" for which that is true, and ones for which it isn't. So?
Everything which is illegal is only illegal because of the specific law which prohibits it. That's pretty much true by definition. So what?
"If people actually believed in free culture they would only consume free items. RIAA artists want you to pay them. Posting keys isnt some glamorous civil-rights disobedience its saying "Dude, now I can totally download more hollywood crap now and act righteous!""
possibly one of the best posts ever on slashdot. good to see some sanity among the brainwashed "teh music bizness is teh evil" crap thats so often peddled here.
The rest of society doesn't feel sorry for you because the rest of society has to work day in and day out to put food on the table. Working for a day, recording the output, and then expecting a lifetime's compensation for that single day's output isn't the way society functions. Get over it. You want to make money as a musician? Perform concerts, work every day, just like the rest of do. The idea of the record as a profit center for primadonna artists is dead. Welcome back to the real world.
Congress is a product of a process controlled by the political parties. The political parties are in turn controlled by monied and powerful interests who let the parties know who they will back, and who they will not. The parties pick from candidates that can get backing, of course, otherwise they will be picking candidates who cannot advertise, campaign and travel freely - in other words, losing candidates. Once acceptable candidates are chosen, then they let the people vote on which one of these hand-picked people is to continue in the (very, very expensive) process. Once elected, carrying out any promises made during the political campaign is strictly optional.
In this way, congress (and the senate, and the presidency) end up being 100% made up of people selected by those same monied and powerful interests. "the people" do not control the type of person, or the obligations of that person. Once in power, the usual currency of politics - being supported to run again by the party, junkets, "fact-finding" trips, dinners, appointments to powerful committees, visits to the white house, campaign contributions, rubbing elbows with the powerful, pork for their district, commitments for speaking engagements, returning as a lobbyist, employment at a think tank, tips on everything from stocks to escorts - these, and more, are the "currency" of "elected" government service. It also doesn't hurt to remember Orwell's assertion that "the purpose of power - is power."
Aside from those people, there is a vast army of unelected, but very powerful individuals who manipulate our daily lives with absolutely no requirement to, or evidence of electing to, pay any attention to public input. Not that such input is lacking; they just don't listen. Examples abound; the FCC with its censorship and pandering to the rich for broadcast (broadcast speech belongs to the rich - period), the FDA with its holding back of therapies even to those who are about to die, the US park service which takes homes from people by force (eminent domain), the Supreme Court, with its topsy-turvy interpretation of the commerce clause, disingenuous support for ex post facto laws, craven ducking of the religion issue, and of course, just generally trampling the constitution left and right. And of course, this is just the tip of the iceberg.
So when you talk about the government - any of it - as being "the people" - you're speaking of a situation that doesn't exist in the United States of America. Our federal and state governments are operating broadly outside the bounds of its constituting authority, within a cycle that is entirely controlled by special interests who have money and power. There are absolutely no signs that this situation is going to change. In the specific case of music and video, the people have already made it quite clear what they want, and they are being roundly ignored by government. Business is showing some movement because their hand is being forced, but legislatively speaking, it is only getting worse on all fronts - patents, copyrights and IP law in general. These laws are not made to benefit the people, and sure enough, they generally don't. As soon as you look to see how they benefit industry, however, the light will begin to dawn.
You may wonder why free speech is allowed with a government gone so catastrophically wrong. The answer is simple: It is far better for them to let you vent than it is have you smolder and suddenly show up on some politician's doorstep with what used to be your second amendment rights in hand. Between that and making sure you achieve a general level of complacency, while being distracted by the current round of boogymen (Terrorists! Pedophiles! Immigrants! Global Warming!), they can keep the population from getting out of hand, even as they trample constitutional rights, engage in broad repression of personal, victimless choices, and pursue military adventures on sovereign foreign soil for the benefit of industry.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
Posting keys isnt some glamorous civil-rights disobedience its saying "Dude, now I can totally download more hollywood crap now and act righteous!"
lemme ask you, if you're downloading the movie, what the heck do you need a key for? the movie you download will be an DivX or XviD file, not an encrypted disc image.
the keys are for those of us who still like to exercise our fair use/fair dealing rights and want to watch our legally purchased HiDef movies on whatever device(s) we want.
upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
Posting keys isnt some glamorous civil-rights disobedience its saying "Dude, now I can totally download more hollywood crap now and act righteous!"
FUD. Once movies have been ripped they can be downloaded and played by anyone without needing the AACS keys. The only people who need the decryption keys already have a physical copy of the movie (presumably they bought or rented it, or received it as a gift). The spread of AACS keys is specifically for being able to play movies on non-windows boxes, rip movies to media servers, or make backup copies for kids who can't watch a movie without scratching the hell out of it. Real pirates keep the keys they extract secret so that their players won't be revoked by the MAFIAA.