The simple fact is this law would be nonsense, but a great way for the US government to harass Americans: you can't legally harass a US citizen? No problem, just ask your mates in Germany to ask you to do so.
As with recent laws pass this defiantly would seem to just give the American government more power. Because in all reality we know that America almost will not bow down to anyone's law but her own, except when it is in it's convince. It could be easily used to harass American citizens, seeing how we all likely break some law everyday, if you take every country in the world into account. (I know all the countries haven't signed yet, just trying to make a point) Obviously these "investigation" will be carried out by American's because they will be aiding our foreign friends.
I do however kind of wonder, if you being forced to hand over encyption keys would be a violation of the 5th. Is there any precedent for this? Cause it would seem the same to be as forced self incrimination.
You can't prevent fraud with an ID card. You can't prevent illegal immigration with an ID card. You can't prevent terrorism with an ID card. Setting aside for the moment the question of whether an ID card can be useful, the Powers That Be are presenting arguments in favor of the cards that are demonstrably bogus. If these are the best arguments that they have for the things, then I'd say we might as well scrap the whole thing now. If there's a valid reason, what is it?
I'm sure most of the powers that want a national ID, know very well that they are pretty much useless in the situation you mentioned. It was seem however they are really focusing on what they CAN do with them.
It would seem to me that a really good solution would be that the legal costs of the plantiff and defendant can not exccede a certain ratio. Say 2 to 1, and if some one wants to exccede the ratio they must give a 1 to 1 ammount to the other party. Obviously the ratio is decided by the lowest number
For example
A defendant has 1 lawer that say charges $100/hr, then the plantiff can not have lawyer that charge more than $200 and hour. If the plantiff wants to spend $300/hr then the must give the plantif $100/hr
I highly doubt we will see anything like thi happening, for some reason i doubt that large coporation will give up their high priced lawyer or that the high priced lawyers would let this happen
giving something back to the country that makes your way of life possible
Why is it when some one opposes a draft they are refusing to give back to their country. Yes we are typical slashdoters because we not willing to be haearded blindly. I am perfectly willing to join and so would everyone else, if he military is willing to comprimise. The fact is being in the military is just another job. They military has almost offered no reason for me to join. The pay is in the low end and i have no respect for martial law.
"Anti-piracy" measures don't protect against wholesale piracy - they just piss off the end customer."
Maybe that was the stratgey all along. We all know DRM doesn't stop piracy, it will most likely increse piracy making it more mainstream. Therefore large corpration will go to captiol hill, be like "well look we ennacted all these DRM things but piracy is on the rise time for some new laws, maybe make copy right violation punishable by death?"
Voice of logic in the goverment "FUCK NO!"
Greddy Corprations "how bout 2 million in "contriubutions"
Goverment "Copy right violation is fenlony punishedable by death, sounds good to us"
Corps "How bout throwing in a anti-piracy initative thats lets us act as dictators and do what ever the fuck we want"
"Let us thinkg for a sec"
$$$$$$$
"SURE!"
Im starting to think about participating in that one way trip to mars right about now
"How about making copyright reform a central issue in the upcoming election?"
Seems insanely unlikely put it this way:
percentage of voter that know wtf the DMCA is is likely less thant 5 percent+running risk of losing "contributions" aka bribes
percentage of voters that are hispanic probaly greater than 30 percent + no risk of losing money
percentage of voters that care about welfare, public assitance programs etc. probaly 50
Which topic do you think a canidate is going to talk about?
I doubt copyright is ever going to be a central topic for the next few decades. Too many voting people dont even know what a copyright is. Only real way we will see copyright reform (in a postive direction that is) is probaly when the RIAA accdiently sues some senators son for file swaping.
Or maybe we need like a geek party, hey if we could get everyone on slashdot to vote we may have a chance
On many occasions i have had to hand in papaers to anti-plagiarizer services, generally I did this without much thought. Now this made me think about it for a sec. It seems to me that the students problems would be something along the lines that the company is making money of the papers they hand in, so the analogy to the drug testing is not really correct. Im thinking that this is a problem because it is well with in the students rights to not hand in the paper to a web site. Mainly because the action of submitting the paper would most likely hand all their rights to the paper of to the website. Now that I have a problem with. For I may not want to have my paper in their database generating profit for them, and also in handing over my right on my paper. I have never seen one of the reports you get from turn it in sites but I assume they would show you where else the text is found. In order for them to do that legally the would have to have permission from you to use your paper, and last time I check I shouldn't have to give that permission to any one but my teacher/school. The solution to this is simple students have the right not to submit their paper, and the school also has the right to closely scrutinize the paper with its personnel.
"If one company goes down the "wrong" alley, I reckon another might just jump to go down the "right" one, especially if they're currently not the market leader..."
The problem that i think most people are worried about is what happens when all the companies agree to go the wrong way becuase it makes $$$$$$?
I wonder how long it is before the record label decide that seeing how they have to pay twice the roylaties naturallty they should make twice the profit, so now you are going to be buying two copies, of which you can only use on one computer for double the price.
"And a particularly appropriate task. After all, one of their primary functions was copying books."
That probaly means that they are now going to get sued for helping pirates distruibte illegal ebooks.
Perhaps more people will switch over to Linux once they learn their days of free downloading may be over if they stick with Microsoft?
Your assuming they will be able to. Seeing how soon motherboards with be DRMed possibly from the bios to the cpu, I doubt they will be able to install any version of linux unless its complies and is "trusted." And seeing how all the major OEM have decided to "officially" embrace DRM we could have a serious problem. First you are going to likely see non-DRM products being sold less, and eventually pressure from the OEM will completely kill all non-drm products. The future looks rather gloomy, hopefully some intelligent politicians will step in and take of that nonsense, but that seems unlikely as of now.
Slashdot Mirror
Of course its not being dropped, its just some PR so they can rename again cause people are starting to realize what this is again.
Politicians in China snoop on, and try to control, the citizens more than politicians in the West do.
China's politicians probaly tops ours, but i bet no one can top our corporation. And yet we seem to enjoy bending over and taking it in the ass
Dont forget sex, intelligence is the most important tool of a cybercriminal
More importantly is country "B" allowed to use the keys if country A obtained them in means illegal in country B ie tourture?
The simple fact is this law would be nonsense, but a great way for the US government to harass Americans: you can't legally harass a US citizen? No problem, just ask your mates in Germany to ask you to do so.
As with recent laws pass this defiantly would seem to just give the American government more power. Because in all reality we know that America almost will not bow down to anyone's law but her own, except when it is in it's convince. It could be easily used to harass American citizens, seeing how we all likely break some law everyday, if you take every country in the world into account. (I know all the countries haven't signed yet, just trying to make a point) Obviously these "investigation" will be carried out by American's because they will be aiding our foreign friends.
I do however kind of wonder, if you being forced to hand over encyption keys would be a violation of the 5th. Is there any precedent for this? Cause it would seem the same to be as forced self incrimination.
more like
...with liberty and justice for all....
Dont forget...
$$$$>Consitution
Isnt SSL also encrypted? So does that mean no more online shopping and banking?
Yes....but you will be capped at 30 GB
Now that makes me wonder, if i keep the virtual church window open and the look at pr0n am i in the clear? Or maybe i need a virtual confessional?
You can't prevent fraud with an ID card. You can't prevent illegal immigration with an ID card. You can't prevent terrorism with an ID card. Setting aside for the moment the question of whether an ID card can be useful, the Powers That Be are presenting arguments in favor of the cards that are demonstrably bogus. If these are the best arguments that they have for the things, then I'd say we might as well scrap the whole thing now. If there's a valid reason, what is it?
I'm sure most of the powers that want a national ID, know very well that they are pretty much useless in the situation you mentioned. It was seem however they are really focusing on what they CAN do with them.
It would seem to me that a really good solution would be that the legal costs of the plantiff and defendant can not exccede a certain ratio. Say 2 to 1, and if some one wants to exccede the ratio they must give a 1 to 1 ammount to the other party. Obviously the ratio is decided by the lowest number For example A defendant has 1 lawer that say charges $100/hr, then the plantiff can not have lawyer that charge more than $200 and hour. If the plantiff wants to spend $300/hr then the must give the plantif $100/hr I highly doubt we will see anything like thi happening, for some reason i doubt that large coporation will give up their high priced lawyer or that the high priced lawyers would let this happen
Any decrease in profit will be blamed on piracy naturally
I am wondering if this is enough to give Darl a ticket to camp x-ray?
giving something back to the country that makes your way of life possible
Why is it when some one opposes a draft they are refusing to give back to their country. Yes we are typical slashdoters because we not willing to be haearded blindly. I am perfectly willing to join and so would everyone else, if he military is willing to comprimise. The fact is being in the military is just another job. They military has almost offered no reason for me to join. The pay is in the low end and i have no respect for martial law.
hrmm.....what about the 30 fans i have in my computer?
hmm...banks..i dont think so, more like loan sharks for musicians.
But we all know if it used linux we probaly would have found martians and osama already!
"Anti-piracy" measures don't protect against wholesale piracy - they just piss off the end customer."
Maybe that was the stratgey all along. We all know DRM doesn't stop piracy, it will most likely increse piracy making it more mainstream. Therefore large corpration will go to captiol hill, be like "well look we ennacted all these DRM things but piracy is on the rise time for some new laws, maybe make copy right violation punishable by death?"
Voice of logic in the goverment "FUCK NO!"
Greddy Corprations "how bout 2 million in "contriubutions"
Goverment "Copy right violation is fenlony punishedable by death, sounds good to us"
Corps "How bout throwing in a anti-piracy initative thats lets us act as dictators and do what ever the fuck we want"
"Let us thinkg for a sec"
$$$$$$$
"SURE!"
Im starting to think about participating in that one way trip to mars right about now
"How about making copyright reform a central issue in the upcoming election?"
Seems insanely unlikely put it this way:
percentage of voter that know wtf the DMCA is is likely less thant 5 percent+running risk of losing "contributions" aka bribes
percentage of voters that are hispanic probaly greater than 30 percent + no risk of losing money
percentage of voters that care about welfare, public assitance programs etc. probaly 50
Which topic do you think a canidate is going to talk about?
I doubt copyright is ever going to be a central topic for the next few decades. Too many voting people dont even know what a copyright is. Only real way we will see copyright reform (in a postive direction that is) is probaly when the RIAA accdiently sues some senators son for file swaping.
Or maybe we need like a geek party, hey if we could get everyone on slashdot to vote we may have a chance
On many occasions i have had to hand in papaers to anti-plagiarizer services, generally I did this without much thought. Now this made me think about it for a sec. It seems to me that the students problems would be something along the lines that the company is making money of the papers they hand in, so the analogy to the drug testing is not really correct. Im thinking that this is a problem because it is well with in the students rights to not hand in the paper to a web site. Mainly because the action of submitting the paper would most likely hand all their rights to the paper of to the website. Now that I have a problem with. For I may not want to have my paper in their database generating profit for them, and also in handing over my right on my paper. I have never seen one of the reports you get from turn it in sites but I assume they would show you where else the text is found. In order for them to do that legally the would have to have permission from you to use your paper, and last time I check I shouldn't have to give that permission to any one but my teacher/school. The solution to this is simple students have the right not to submit their paper, and the school also has the right to closely scrutinize the paper with its personnel.
"If one company goes down the "wrong" alley, I reckon another might just jump to go down the "right" one, especially if they're currently not the market leader..." The problem that i think most people are worried about is what happens when all the companies agree to go the wrong way becuase it makes $$$$$$?
I wonder how long it is before the record label decide that seeing how they have to pay twice the roylaties naturallty they should make twice the profit, so now you are going to be buying two copies, of which you can only use on one computer for double the price.
"And a particularly appropriate task. After all, one of their primary functions was copying books." That probaly means that they are now going to get sued for helping pirates distruibte illegal ebooks.
Perhaps more people will switch over to Linux once they learn their days of free downloading may be over if they stick with Microsoft?
Your assuming they will be able to. Seeing how soon motherboards with be DRMed possibly from the bios to the cpu, I doubt they will be able to install any version of linux unless its complies and is "trusted." And seeing how all the major OEM have decided to "officially" embrace DRM we could have a serious problem. First you are going to likely see non-DRM products being sold less, and eventually pressure from the OEM will completely kill all non-drm products. The future looks rather gloomy, hopefully some intelligent politicians will step in and take of that nonsense, but that seems unlikely as of now.