Did anyone actually read the complaint? It shows ReplayTV and SonicBlue as DEFENDANTS, not Plaintiffs. Why would PVR supporters sue the PVR manufacturers?
There's been a lot of comments here about trying to relate this ruling to the gun lobby arguments. Apples and oranges if you ask me.
Much better would be to look at the Sony v. Betamax case. In that case, the judge said that VCR (known as VTRs then) manufacturers should be allowed to produce VCRs since the new technology had, "substantial non-infringing uses". Translation: Just because the technology can allow copyright violations, that doesn't mean that it should be outlawed. (copying machines, tape recorders, etc).
I couldn't believe this when I read it. I'm a public policy student doing major research on high tech's influence in DC. The Digital Rights Management (DRM) debate was brought to Hollings not by Disney alone, but by News Corp. as well (FOX)! News Corp, and its movie production studios stand to win equally as much as Disney in this debate. I've spoken with hardware makers government affairs spokesmen, and they're ready to fight this to the hilt...and they have DEMOCRATS supporting them!
Okay, so it seems lots of people are dissing this project...but what if you, the user, could get something tangible out of it? How about applying this model of processor sharing to an ISP. Give users FREE DSL or higher access to the Internet, without banners. All the funding comes from "rent" which corporations pay the ISP to use their customer's CPUs during idle time.
Seems like a winning model to me!
My question is, will this network infrastructure give people more or less privacy on the Internet? I figure that if you want something on his idea of the new Internet, there will be a specific IP address attached to a specific computer that created the document. However, on the Internet we have today, that doesn't seem to be the case. Will this just give the government better access to our personal harddrives?
All this discussion on politics and technology needs to go to some collective efforts. People have brought up excellent points, but it seems that when the techie community wants to talk politics, its voice is almost instantly squashed, or at least never crescendoed to a point where it can actually make a real difference.
This can all change! Join us at the Political Information Center Network to shake sleep Washington out of bed. The chaos in Florida would not have happened if people actually listened to Slashdot posters a year ago!
But we can actually make a difference, and it's time. Let's consolidate our voices to push forward not any specific political agenda, but rather a voice for reasoned technological change for the 21st century.
Slashdot Mirror
Here's the PDF of the complaint:
http://www.eff.org/IP/Video/Newmark_v_Turner/2002
Much better would be to look at the Sony v. Betamax case. In that case, the judge said that VCR (known as VTRs then) manufacturers should be allowed to produce VCRs since the new technology had, "substantial non-infringing uses". Translation: Just because the technology can allow copyright violations, that doesn't mean that it should be outlawed. (copying machines, tape recorders, etc).
Case: Sony v. Betamax
Stick to recording technologies when making intellectual property copying arguements, not guns.
I couldn't believe this when I read it. I'm a public policy student doing major research on high tech's influence in DC. The Digital Rights Management (DRM) debate was brought to Hollings not by Disney alone, but by News Corp. as well (FOX)! News Corp, and its movie production studios stand to win equally as much as Disney in this debate. I've spoken with hardware makers government affairs spokesmen, and they're ready to fight this to the hilt...and they have DEMOCRATS supporting them!
Talk about bad journalism...
-Ozzy
Okay, so it seems lots of people are dissing this project...but what if you, the user, could get something tangible out of it? How about applying this model of processor sharing to an ISP. Give users FREE DSL or higher access to the Internet, without banners. All the funding comes from "rent" which corporations pay the ISP to use their customer's CPUs during idle time. Seems like a winning model to me!
My question is, will this network infrastructure give people more or less privacy on the Internet? I figure that if you want something on his idea of the new Internet, there will be a specific IP address attached to a specific computer that created the document. However, on the Internet we have today, that doesn't seem to be the case. Will this just give the government better access to our personal harddrives?
This can all change! Join us at the Political Information Center Network to shake sleep Washington out of bed. The chaos in Florida would not have happened if people actually listened to Slashdot posters a year ago!
But we can actually make a difference, and it's time. Let's consolidate our voices to push forward not any specific political agenda, but rather a voice for reasoned technological change for the 21st century.
Join the fight at:
PICnet - The Political Information Center Network
Are Macs also being affected by this loophole? Is Gates trying to get everyone's information to make us buy more of his products?!
Didn't the Russians say just last week that a US vessel was nearby, hinting that the US may have shot at them? Hmmm... -Ozzy