Tennessee's Super-DMCA Rises From The Grave 245
Tsar writes "Members of the Tennessee Digital Freedom Network turned out in force as Tennessee's Super-DMCA Bill, its hour come round at last, slouched back to Nashville's Legislative Plaza. The industry heavyweights made their pitches, but were thwarted by thoughtful, intelligent comments and questions from the newly-formed Joint Committee on Communications Security. My favorite quote of the day: 'I stand here before you as representing the MPAA, one of the leading advocates of First Amendment rights...' I think I blacked out for a minute after that."
Excuse me???? (Score:3, Interesting)
She then introduced the next two speakers, who she said "speak around the country on this specific piece of legislation." Senator Trail asked her why we needed this legislation at all since we already had laws that made cable theft illegal. She stated that the existing law only covers analog, not digital cable theft--giving the impression that, without this new bill, digital cable theft is legal. In responding to Senator Trail's continuing questions about this, she also admitted that the primary goal of the new legislation was getting stronger civil penalties.
Are they actually claiming that it's legal to steal cable TV if the cable is digital?????? WTF???????
Re:When will it end? (Score:3, Interesting)
That's the problem... we are NOT a democracy, we are an Oligarcy.
if you vote next year you do NOT vote for your president, you vote for a person to vote for president.
Until we can tear down the system in place that makes everything so easy to corrupt, you will only get presidents in the white house that are nothing but puppets that tow the party line and ensure that the party's funder's interests are that which is on the top of the pile and in front with the most attention.
This copyright crap will end when congresscritters get their offices buried in US mail Letters all screaming that if they dont oppose every copyright extension, strengthening, and DCMA type bill that comes through, they will not be voted for and will be badmouthed all over town by said letter writer.
but in the USA, americans are way too lazy and dont give a rats ass to write a letter and spend 37 cents to mail it. they dont care.
Hell, you want to see change in Govt? figure out how to get only 50% of the minorities to vote. they would outnumber the "majority" voters 2 to 1.
Re:what freedom do u guys actually have? (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm pretty familiar with both the USA and the Netherlands, and have spent some time in both countries every year for the last ten years or so.
The thing about the USA is that it appears more free if you're an orthodox sort of person that fits in with everyone else around you and doesn't actually want to make any choices that the rest of your culture think are somehow immoral or improper.
What the USA doesn't do very well, in my opinion, is brook difference or dissent -- and to me, a culture that is able to tolerate or embrace those those things is one that meets my idea of a free.
There's no equivalent of Rush Limbaugh or Pat Buchanan in the Netherlands, spewing hate across the airwaves. And if you want to smoke pot or have some kind of unorthodox sex, the state doesn't feel it has any role in policing those areas of private morality.
So while I think your main point is essentially correct -- the Netherlands is a conservative country, and the culture and many of its institutions are also somewhat conservative, but its profound and deep-rooted tolerance for me makes it a much freer environment than the USA could ever be.
That said, what you do have in the USA is a much greater degree of economic freedom -- be that the freedom to make a million, or the freedom to sleep under a bridge because minimum wage jobs don't pay enough to both feed and accomodate you.
Re:I live in TN and dont like this.... (Score:2, Interesting)
More Tennesseans need to do exactly this. They may be suprised on just how easy it is to contact them.
Re:Don't you dare comment! (Score:2, Interesting)
Today is a good day... (Score:2, Interesting)
I guess hicks don't like oppressive legislation, regardless of it's focus.
the important question here is... (Score:4, Interesting)
For example, does the "communications service" end at your cable/DSL/dialup modem?
Or does it end at your web-browser?
Or what?
If we cant get these new bills overturned completly, we should push for clear definitions of just what a "communications service" is to be enshrined into the bills. That way, they can only be applied in the ways that the law-makers intend.
My take on why these bills are being pushed for:
1.to enable companies providing "communications services" (e.g. cable providers, telcos etc) to go after people who are stealing service (e.g. cable pirates, phone phreakers etc)
2.to enable those same providers to have greater controlls over the networks (for example, cable companies can make it illegal to plug digital recorders into their networks and record stuff)
Re:Flat-rate charging the culprit? (Score:1, Interesting)
Where I live (the Netherlands) it is pretty common that cable providers try to say that running a server is illegal, but they stopped making an issue of NAT boxes since they do want those customers with internet capable game consoles and do see why those customers are not gonna switch their 'modem' between their computer and console all the time.
With DSL providrs the story is a lot better, the one I use, and many of them here, do explicitly allow you to run a server. My DSL connection came with documentation about how to setup a srver, and the profile my provider gives you with the dsl modem they sell is explicitly made to allow it.
They even went as far as giving me a temporary reduction on my subscription fee because I happen to run a mail service whioch is used by quite a few of their customers, and me moving onto their network saved them some bandwidth.
No, this has nothing to do with flatrate broadband, it is a viable business model when you can offer bandwidth for almost nothing anyway.
Cable companies have a much harder time then specialized telcos since the cable companies have a conflict of interest. One type of content will get them money if they allow their customers access (tv), the other type costs some money (internet) and it so happens that the ones who pay for the first dislike the later.
That they can earn money on the later from their customers is nice, but the margins are lower, and they definitely do not want to upset the people who generate their tv based cashflow.
Re:When will it end? (Score:5, Interesting)
It would be interesting to trace back to see who got the ball rolling to change copyright laws and so on. I'd bet good money it was the mega companies of the US, and not the citizens. Why would citizens be pushing to get less control over their property? Goes to show who really runs the country. All they (companies, govt) need us for is to fill their pockets with money. Oh, and human interest stories to make them smell rosy after all is said and done.
Re:Incredulous Assertions==Lies (Score:3, Interesting)
I did find these numbers. [gomemphis.com] "Time Warner Cable has about 124,000 customers in Memphis, about 10,000 in Germantown, about 8,500 Bartlett, and about 9,000 in the West Memphis system, which includes Sunset and Marion, Williams said."
Now that's about 152,000 subscribers. So according to this for every 2.5 subscribers there is a thief.
Do you believe that?
The point is the Memphis cable company posits the number 60,000 thieves to make their claim of significant loss to influence the generally pro-business attitude of the legislature. They are using this technique to further restrict our rights. [Cable service theft is already illegal.And prosecuters have sufficient tools to enforce existing laws.] I think we should examine their numbers to see if they are valid. We should at least have an open and honest debate.