I encourage everyone to read the PDF linked in the submission.
The LOC has a narrow mandate and they lay out very clearly what they will listen to and what they will not.
If you hope to submit a comment, or have any effect on the DMCA as a member of the general public, short of getting elected to congress or becoming a defendant, for god's sake read the PDF and construct a coherent argument according to their guidelines.
Last time around, these guidelines were not available as the LOC had a short time to prepare and didn't really know what they were looking for. This time the rules of the game are more clear. I think this provides circumvention advocates with a clearer path to a beneficial rulemaking.
Examples of things they don't want to hear about:
Constitutionality
Extrajurisdictional enforcement
Hypotheticals, unless they are going to come to pass in the next three years
What they do want to hear about:
Classes of works (along traditional categories of authorship like musical works, literature, databases
and how enforcement of the DMCA in the substantially hampers non-infringing use
Please read the PDF the LOC has provided. They state clearly their mandate from congress and what arguments might sway them.
The LOC doesn't give two rats whiskers about the constitutionality of the law. Do not write to them about the constitutionality of the law. They have one mandate, and that is to examine if there are "classes of works" for which enforcement of the DMCA would "substantially harm" legitimate, non-infringing use of those classes of works.
The legal battles to have the law overturned as unconstitutional are a logically seperate issue from what the LOC rules. If the LOC exempts certain classes of works (as it has already two), then either the law will be declared unconstitutional for another reason or enough works will be exempted (due to legitimate argumentation from interested/harmed parties) that the DMCA will be unenforceable by its own mandate.
The best solution would be to argue to the LOC according to its terms, conceding its strict mandate and forming coherent reasons that everything worthwhile should be exempt (one class at a time, like the PDF requests), and fight the battle of unconstitutionality in the courts. Any spurious assertions or argumentation will be posted on the LOC's webpage, but nobody will read past the first paragraph.
Instead of merely preformatting future harddrives, they'll all come preinstalled with Microsoft DRM-OS.
The cost of hard drives will increase 4-fold, and it will be "our own fault for pirating Windows so damned much." Congress will pass a law prohibiting the reformatting of hard drives to circumvent the DRM-OS (oh, I suppose the DMCA would apply, but they'll pass another law for good measure).
Someone will be made an example of, probably a dirty hacker-type who was getting a little too uppity with his IT-grade salary. Too rich for the poor folk to sympathize with, but too poor to admire for his chutzpah. The public will fall into line, and the publishing industry will be double-plus-safe. What a relief for all of us that will be, because there'll be no reason to fight anymore. We will have lost.
Imagine the same action taken by a large publisher in the bookselling industry.
Barnes and Noble: "Our contract with HarperCollins stipulates we can no longer sell blank journals or college ruled notebooks. Customers will have the following options:
1. Purchase a book published by HarperCollins. 2. Purchase a book published by another publisher.
HarperCollins demanded this because we all know people don't use blank paper to write their own stories or notes, but to pirate their intellectual property.
Though I'd skip the part where the voter verifies it, because you'd have people wandering off with the votes in their pockets, screwing up the recount.
Have the vote tabulated on a log in a locked box, maybe with a window so the current voter can see their tabulation and has an opportunity to report an error. The tabulation falls away from the window when the voter confirms it is correct.
Applying statistics to countable things is a Bad Idea. There were an actual, countable number of people who voted; therefore, there was an actual, countable winner. Like it was said before, this isn't rocket science.
I agree that the system is flawed, but it should be repaired in such a way that makes disparate outcomes while retabulating the data IMPOSSIBLE, not to suggest that voting is a statistical measure. Even if we wanted to decide the vote was actually a poll representative of the feelings of all voting Americans, it would be poor statistics. Moving actual, countable 1:1 phenomenon into the realm of statistics offends the sensibilities.
What's my solution? Electronic voting machines that fucking print out a logfile of votes into a locked cabinet. Why are people so damned compartmentalized they don't think a digital voting machine can't generate a paper trail?!
How long until we are required to show chain of custody documetns & receipts for every single object we own, lest the government sieze them as stolen?
Happens that way with real property all the time. Why do you think so much is involved in buying a house, including buying insurance to protect the deed's validity?
k appeal, everyone there was respectful of the court, save the time the lawyer for the government, when pressed admitted that DeCSS posed not actual harm, but "well, threat of actual harm."
Those of us currently hosting the DMCA lecture series in Minnesota first tried to arrange meetings with our senators a few months ago. We hand-delivered letters to their local offices outlining our thoughts on the DMCA, and requested some time to sit with either the senator or someone from his office to discuss matters further. This was roundabout August, I think.
We never heard a response from either one--not a "no," not a form letter, nothing--by phone, fax, letter or email. It seems even coming to their office doesn't make a big impression on anyone.
Our group has put a bit of work behind a lecture series we hope will bring intellectual property to the public debate... but we just don't have the money to advertise it sufficiently.
If only there were a clearinghouse, where technodonors could read about and choose to support the technoactivists they like... I hoped Slashdot would help us reach supporters to help fund our efforts, it seems like the most likely candidate at this stage in the game. Alas, they won't post stories about "local" events.
Our group, organized in response to the arrest of Dmitry Sklyarov, is trying to do this.
We have organized a lecture series to take place over the coming months, but need help advertising it to the public.
Speakers include Dan Burk of the University of Minnesota's Law School,
John Logie of the University of Minnesota's Department of Rhetoric and Bruce Schneier of Counterpane Internet Security, author of Secrets and Lies: Digital Security in a Networked World
CNN, ABCnews, etc were all incapacitated. Even if I were foolish enough to use *them* as my primary news source, I don't visit their sites first. Today, I would have been wasting my time to even try to visit their sites.
All you get on CNN, Fox and even NPR now is redundant coverage, talking heads and speculation--which is why I don't use them for "news" on a day-to-day basis. Or am I supposed to assume that I need to check the "valid" news sources for terrorist attacks when I wake up every morning?
I won't respond to your ad hominem attacks, but I stand by my original post: Slashdot has done a great service to its readers by posting this breaking news and remaining accessible through the deluge of information and traffic, as well as for providing their usual discussion services which far exceed the glib "info-poll" applets you see on the established news sources. As far as I'm concerned they've provided the best coverage of this event, from a functional standpoint, available on the web. Its operators should be proud. Call it offtopic, but it's true and we should acknowledge it.
But everyone knows all that already. At least what I said was news. Life goes on, and I'm already tired of hearing people talk on and on about how nobody knows anything new and meanwhile they're getting paid to speculate, conjecture and fill time.
That Slashdot once again survived an unintentional DDos attack in a time of crisis, that the major news sites could not, is worthwhile information. People are coming to Slashdot to share information. What a feat.
Slashdot Mirror
The LOC has a narrow mandate and they lay out very clearly what they will listen to and what they will not.
If you hope to submit a comment, or have any effect on the DMCA as a member of the general public, short of getting elected to congress or becoming a defendant, for god's sake read the PDF and construct a coherent argument according to their guidelines.
Last time around, these guidelines were not available as the LOC had a short time to prepare and didn't really know what they were looking for. This time the rules of the game are more clear. I think this provides circumvention advocates with a clearer path to a beneficial rulemaking.
Examples of things they don't want to hear about:
What they do want to hear about:
This isn't exhaustive. Read the PDF. Thanks.
Please read the PDF the LOC has provided. They state clearly their mandate from congress and what arguments might sway them.
The LOC doesn't give two rats whiskers about the constitutionality of the law. Do not write to them about the constitutionality of the law. They have one mandate, and that is to examine if there are "classes of works" for which enforcement of the DMCA would "substantially harm" legitimate, non-infringing use of those classes of works.
The legal battles to have the law overturned as unconstitutional are a logically seperate issue from what the LOC rules. If the LOC exempts certain classes of works (as it has already two), then either the law will be declared unconstitutional for another reason or enough works will be exempted (due to legitimate argumentation from interested/harmed parties) that the DMCA will be unenforceable by its own mandate.
The best solution would be to argue to the LOC according to its terms, conceding its strict mandate and forming coherent reasons that everything worthwhile should be exempt (one class at a time, like the PDF requests), and fight the battle of unconstitutionality in the courts. Any spurious assertions or argumentation will be posted on the LOC's webpage, but nobody will read past the first paragraph.
Been done.
If you ask nicely, I'll give you a good URL from where you can download it.
See also: illegal art, valenti cracks
Instead of merely preformatting future harddrives, they'll all come preinstalled with Microsoft DRM-OS.
The cost of hard drives will increase 4-fold, and it will be "our own fault for pirating Windows so damned much." Congress will pass a law prohibiting the reformatting of hard drives to circumvent the DRM-OS (oh, I suppose the DMCA would apply, but they'll pass another law for good measure).
Someone will be made an example of, probably a dirty hacker-type who was getting a little too uppity with his IT-grade salary. Too rich for the poor folk to sympathize with, but too poor to admire for his chutzpah. The public will fall into line, and the publishing industry will be double-plus-safe. What a relief for all of us that will be, because there'll be no reason to fight anymore. We will have lost.
Imagine the same action taken by a large publisher in the bookselling industry.
Barnes and Noble: "Our contract with HarperCollins stipulates we can no longer sell blank journals or college ruled notebooks. Customers will have the following options:
1. Purchase a book published by HarperCollins.
2. Purchase a book published by another publisher.
HarperCollins demanded this because we all know people don't use blank paper to write their own stories or notes, but to pirate their intellectual property.
FYI-This affects all our competitors as well."
Hooray!
Though I'd skip the part where the voter verifies it, because you'd have people wandering off with the votes in their pockets, screwing up the recount.
Have the vote tabulated on a log in a locked box, maybe with a window so the current voter can see their tabulation and has an opportunity to report an error. The tabulation falls away from the window when the voter confirms it is correct.
Applying statistics to countable things is a Bad Idea. There were an actual, countable number of people who voted; therefore, there was an actual, countable winner. Like it was said before, this isn't rocket science.
I agree that the system is flawed, but it should be repaired in such a way that makes disparate outcomes while retabulating the data IMPOSSIBLE, not to suggest that voting is a statistical measure. Even if we wanted to decide the vote was actually a poll representative of the feelings of all voting Americans, it would be poor statistics. Moving actual, countable 1:1 phenomenon into the realm of statistics offends the sensibilities.
What's my solution? Electronic voting machines that fucking print out a logfile of votes into a locked cabinet. Why are people so damned compartmentalized they don't think a digital voting machine can't generate a paper trail?!
How long until we are required to show chain of custody documetns & receipts for every single object we own, lest the government sieze them as stolen?
Happens that way with real property all the time. Why do you think so much is involved in buying a house, including buying insurance to protect the deed's validity?
At first glance, I thought it said "NASA to Investigate Hubris."
k appeal, everyone there was respectful of the court, save the time the lawyer for the government, when pressed admitted that DeCSS posed not actual harm, but "well, threat of actual harm."
The entire courtroom laughed, judges included.
Estoppel?
When the light is ON, the data is "1"
When the light is off, the data is "0"
Once you master the hypercube, see if you can explain to me what the heck this is all about.
A new sense for the word defenestrate.
Uhhh.. I'm working until 11pm--and there's a party AT MY HOUSE. Happy new year.
My girlfriend works here, they might have the job for you...
Those of us currently hosting the DMCA lecture series in Minnesota first tried to arrange meetings with our senators a few months ago. We hand-delivered letters to their local offices outlining our thoughts on the DMCA, and requested some time to sit with either the senator or someone from his office to discuss matters further. This was roundabout August, I think.
We never heard a response from either one--not a "no," not a form letter, nothing--by phone, fax, letter or email. It seems even coming to their office doesn't make a big impression on anyone.
IIRC, most cases appealed to the SC are denied cert without comment. Their action "speaks for itself" in that there's little to infer from it.
If only there were a clearinghouse, where technodonors could read about and choose to support the technoactivists they like... I hoped Slashdot would help us reach supporters to help fund our efforts, it seems like the most likely candidate at this stage in the game. Alas, they won't post stories about "local" events.
We have organized a lecture series to take place over the coming months, but need help advertising it to the public.
Speakers include Dan Burk of the University of Minnesota's Law School, John Logie of the University of Minnesota's Department of Rhetoric and Bruce Schneier of Counterpane Internet Security, author of Secrets and Lies: Digital Security in a Networked World
Read about our efforts at underwhelm.org.
For supporting role in causing the WTC to collapse: *gravity*. Ever play Jenga?
CNN, ABCnews, etc were all incapacitated. Even if I were foolish enough to use *them* as my primary news source, I don't visit their sites first. Today, I would have been wasting my time to even try to visit their sites.
All you get on CNN, Fox and even NPR now is redundant coverage, talking heads and speculation--which is why I don't use them for "news" on a day-to-day basis. Or am I supposed to assume that I need to check the "valid" news sources for terrorist attacks when I wake up every morning?
I won't respond to your ad hominem attacks, but I stand by my original post: Slashdot has done a great service to its readers by posting this breaking news and remaining accessible through the deluge of information and traffic, as well as for providing their usual discussion services which far exceed the glib "info-poll" applets you see on the established news sources. As far as I'm concerned they've provided the best coverage of this event, from a functional standpoint, available on the web. Its operators should be proud. Call it offtopic, but it's true and we should acknowledge it.
The one thing a person cannot afford to have is a sense of perspective.
But everyone knows all that already. At least what I said was news. Life goes on, and I'm already tired of hearing people talk on and on about how nobody knows anything new and meanwhile they're getting paid to speculate, conjecture and fill time.
That Slashdot once again survived an unintentional DDos attack in a time of crisis, that the major news sites could not, is worthwhile information. People are coming to Slashdot to share information. What a feat.
Let's keep the truly remarkable thing in mind abou this: we heard about it on Slashdot first. Great job, guys.