Slashdot Mirror
13 Years After DeCSS Case, Congressional IT Endorses VLC
New submitter robp writes "After a link to VLC showed up in one of HBO's DMCA takedown requests, I recalled how often I've linked to VLC in my own copy, and how often I've seen that app noted across traditional-media outlets — even though you could make the same arguments against linking to it that Judge Kaplan bought in 2000. Now, though, even the House's own IT department not only links to this CSS-circumventing app but endorses it. Question is, what led to this enlightenment?"
Either that or there are now aware enough and truly computer literate people are emplyed in the IT department (at least in regard to media tech)
If computers were people, I'd be a misanthrope.
As soon as some unaware VLC-hating corporate campaign donor gets wind of this, you can bet your useless vote that said endorsement will be history.
Scruting the inscrutable for over 50 years.
Where's the news? As soon as some politicians notice that some "illegal" tool, device, substance or whatever is useful to them, suddenly it's no longer illegal.
That's actually a bit unusual.
... but their own guards are armed. Usually the politicians are complete hypocrites about it because they think they're special and the rules for everyone else shouldn't apply to them.
A more typical example would be the anti-gun politicians who really don't want any private ownership of firearms at all
It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
Lobbyists will flood the streets of Washington and this will be down before August. While the decision by the IT staff is sensible and sane that won't change the thinking of the entertainment industry. I know someone in this industry and they produced a pilot good show a few years ago that they just couldn't sell. So I suggested that they promote it via various torrents and whatnot. This person just about lost their mind. It wasn't that they disagreed with my marketing logic it was that they wouldn't allow those pirating bastards to make one cent off their work. I pointed out that he wasn't making one cent off his work either.
This and other factors leads me to believe that the thinking inside the movie industry that the whole internet (Netflix types included) is pure evil. This thinking seems to be religious in nature. So if you sell you wares on Netflix you have gone to the dark side.
An example of the venom that I once heard about Netflix was that they won't do things like feature one work over another based on kickbacks or politicing. Basically the traditional TV types are comfortable when they can use their political weight to push their show into the primetime slot on Thursday which guarantees an audience. Whereas Netflix is more of "If people want it they will click on it". This does not sit well with people who would rather use their sharp elbows to make their crap shows a success.
So these government IT people are showing a hint of reality by putting up the most used tool VLC. But the lobbyists will show their well financed Fantasy thinking by shutting this down before the end of the month. So in the long term they will run out of money to finance this stupid fantasy of theirs but they have a lot of money so it will take a long time.
VLC was never illegal. Unpopular with Hollywood DRM advocates, maybe, but never illegal.
The cesspool just got a check and balance.
You are quite correct, Gangsters need good quality media players like VLC. In fact, to say they desire good media players like VLC would be correct also.
My granddad was part of "Organized Crime" and he liked good radios, good TVs, good cars, good air conditioners, good stores, good roads, good food and good people (they paid their debts without sending out the goons). While he didn't pay retail for everything, he did pay taxes of all sorts at least some of the time.
My granddad worked hard for his money earned through legal as well as illegal businesses. He raised eight children and paid for their educational pursuits (to Bachelor-level). He and his wife encourage their grandchildren to be good members of the community and citizens. When one of his sons died, he adopted his granddaughter, raised her and supported her through Master-level education.
Were he alive today, he would applaud the VLC developers and publisher for their independent nature, self-sufficiency and service to the communities that they serve.
VLC is also cross-platform--one thing that I greatly appreciate about VLC.
More likely, the addition of the program came without knowledge that it included an illegal decryption program. Once it comes to the attention of the lawyers (which, thanks to this story, is more likely now than ever) it will probably be removed.
The "best practices" PDF isn't recommending it /because/ it plays DVDs or uses DeCSS, after all. The article suggests best practices for setting up a Congressional website and one of those practices is "Any page that links to a multimedia file (or an audio file) should include access to software that allows the file to be accessed." VLC is just one of four media players listed (and it's mentioned after Quicktime and RealPlayer!). Whoever updated this PDF probably threw in VLC without being aware of its potential illegality and nobody up the line caught the mistake. I mean, it's a one-time mention on page 153 of a 250 page document!
Hell, /I/ didn't even know VLC used DeCSS code to read DVDs. Then again, I don't think I've ever /used/ VLC to play a DVD; I barely use disc-based media anymore...
So, yeah, most likely a mistake by the poor intern tasked with writing "revision 36" of this document. Expect mention of VLC to be gone by revision 37.
A more typical example would be the anti-gun politicians who really don't want any private ownership of firearms at all ... but their own guards are armed.
It's better than that. Dianne Feinstein, the poster child for taking guns away, actually has a concealed carry permit and does or did carry a concealed revolver, while at the same time preaching about how citizens don't need guns for self-defense, especially pistols or assault rifles. It's more personally hypocritical than even you have made it out to be. Causality, indeed.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
I'm glad not to have a Bluray drive or any bluray discs. Every disc and drive bought supports software patents many which are of course of dubious validity. And that money supports further draconian DRM and more bribes to the congresses of the world. Not to mention both drives and discs can be bricked by new discs, firmware updates, internet checks etc. Part of the reason I never bought into this junk is because you can never be sure the 'content protection path' is going to work with your hardware. It's just not worth it.
Waterfox - a Firefox fork with legacy extension support, security updates and better privacy by default.
According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Dianne_Feinstein, she acquired a permit in the 70s and surrendered it in 1982.
TheDMCA was heald not to apply to the goverment:
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2008/08/air-force-cracks-software-carpet-bombs-dmca/
"So, yeah, most likely a mistake by the poor intern tasked with writing "revision 36" of this document. Expect mention of VLC to be gone by revision 37."
Darn, just after he got dumped by NTSB for confirming the offensive joke pilot names, he steps in it again.
Where's the news? As soon as some politicians notice that some "illegal" tool, device, substance or whatever is useful to them, suddenly it's no longer illegal.
Technically, VLC isn't illegal. It can play all sorts of formats and by default it cannot play encrypted DVDs. Now, if you install libdvdcss, well, VLC is just reading the decrypted stream that libdvdcss provided, but that is through your actions, not VLCs or its developers.
What's the issue. VLC does not decrypt DVDs and plays a myriad of formats, all legally. If one takes the step to install libdvdcss, which does decrypt the DVD that is the individual doing that, not VLC. Saying that VLC is responsible for it is like saying Ford is responsible for people speeding.
I don't think it's illegal myself (IANAL, but who in this thread is?), even subject to DMCA logic. It's not “primarily designed or produced” to play DVDs and has more than "limited commercially significant purpose” besides playing DVDs. But I would not be remotely surprised if somebody in the entertainment industry tried to bring a case against it anyway. Like I wrote in the linked article: If a printer manufacturer can try to use the DMCA to put a manufacturer of ink cartridges out of business, why wouldn't a movie studio try to nail VLC as a DVD-cracking tool?
I honestly don't know why nobody has.