Media Industry Wants Mandated Spyware and More 373
An anonymous reader writes "The joint comment filed by the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) and the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) requests anti-infringement software on all home computers, pervasive copyright filtering, border searches, forced US intellectual property policies on foreign nations and a joint departmental agency to combat infringement during major releases." The MPAA would also like to have its rent paid a bit by Congress, with a ban on what seems to me like a useful tool (for those in as well as outside the film industry), the recently-discussed futures market for box-office receipts.
Dupe? (Score:5, Informative)
Pretty much the same as:
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/10/04/15/1559208/Entertainment-Industrys-Dystopia-of-the-Future [slashdot.org]
Re:WHAT? (Score:1, Informative)
meta-amphetamines is my best bet
Re:Hmm ... (Score:2, Informative)
"RIAA and MPAA, go fuck yourselves".
Thanks.
Don't be TOO sure (Score:5, Informative)
Who remembers stoppoliceware.org ? (don't bother clicking - the site has been abandoned, and it's for sale now)
Word was, some years ago, that "Da gubbermint wants to install spyware on your computer to track what you do, and it will report if you have any pirated software, among other things"
Stoppoliceware was one part of a multipronged attack on that idea, and those politicians who were considering it seemed to have abandoned their idea. So, the site was neglected, and finally ceased to exist.
We see that whole thing coming back, around the world today. RIAA and their ilk are looking for antipiracy, but da gubbermint is willing to go along with that program, so that they can install monitoring software of their own.
Unless, of course, there is enough of an outcry against the concept. Australia and New Zealand have been pretty effective in blocking this kind of crap - but I have little faith in the US. So precious few people have the least clue regarding the issues, and those who have a clue often buy into the "Think of the children" nonsense.
Thank God (and Torvalds) for Linux. There won't be any spyware on my machine. The bastards can spy from my internet gateway, but that's as close as they get, unless they come in with a warrant. At that point, I'll most certainly be joining the revolution!
Re:Eh, the typical (Score:3, Informative)
That's how we got the DMCA.. and most all other invasive laws.
Re:What about Linux? (Score:5, Informative)
We're supposed to get one of those spywares any day now, over here in France, thanks to the HADOPI legislation.
When confronted with the problem of making people voluntarily run spyware on FOSS systems, Christine Albanel (ministry of Culture and Communication, proponent of HADOPI), said (my translation):
About software... about free software, of course free software, when you buy, of course, software, for instance the Microsoft pack (this is not free software): Word, Excel, Powerpoint, there are of course firewalls, I just said that, there is security software. But on free software there are also firewalls, which by the way, of course. For instance, we in the ministry, we have a piece of free software, called Open Office and there is indeed security software that prevents the Ministry of Culture to have access, obviously, and the free software editors release firewalls, and even release free [gratis] firewalls. So that argument has no grounds. That is what I wanted to say.
And that is basically the last we heard of it, and they moved on with the project. She said that in front of the entire Assemblée Nationale to the representative who had asked her if she had considered the problem of FOSS systems, including the half-dozen "évidemment" and the unfinished sentences.
Now what happens is that when accused of infringing copyrights, it's the HADOPI authority's word against yours, and despite this being -- supposedly -- a country where you are innocent until proved otherwise, for some reason the burden of proof rests with the infringer here. So your *only* way of demonstrating that you are not guilty is to be running the government-approved spyware, which you can't, because it's HADOPI-style multiplatform, which probably means you can run it on Windows Vista *and* Windows Seven.
Before anyone storms in declaring that's what France gets for being a socialist country and that socialism inevitably leads to governments spying on their citizens: our current government is right wing (on our spectrum), and the Parti Socialiste is against HADOPI.
To conclude, the most likely answer to your question ("What are they going to do? Ban Linux?") is "no, they're just going to pretend it does not exist, and when the time comes to explain why you are not running the spyware, good luck trying to convince them it's related to ethical questions".
Re:WHAT? (Score:4, Informative)
WHAT ARE THEY SMOKING?
Better dope than most of us can afford.
Re:Don't be TOO sure (Score:5, Informative)
http://74.125.45.132/search?q=cache:7AOx1mO30NoJ:www.erollisimarr.com/forum/showthread.php%3Ft%3D18794+stoppoliceware&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-a [74.125.45.132]
It's a forum, where a member copy/pasted some of the old site's mission, and asked about them. There is probably more interesting stuff available on the web, regarding stoppoliceware, if anyone is interested. Or, google for any of these terms:
"The CBDTPA is a bill (S. 2048) proposed in Congress by Senators Fritz Hollings (D-SC) and Ted Stevens (R-Alaska), along with Senators Daniel Inouye (D-HI), John Breaux (D-LA), Bill Nelson (D-FL), and Dianne Feinstein (D-CA). The acronym stands for "Consumer Broadband and Digital Television Promotion Act". Note that the CBDTPA was originally known as the "SSSCA" while in draft form."
Ahhhh - here's the bill:
http://www.politechbot.com/docs/cbdtpa/hollings.s2048.032102.html [politechbot.com]
Re:This is hilarious (Score:3, Informative)
Don't laugh, they already drug that excuse out quite well to keep ACTA under wraps.
Will likely be implemented (Score:5, Informative)
Unfortunately this is MORE LIKELY to happen than not. The Vice President is fully influencing the President [tinymixtapes.com] on this matter and it's not in a way we like. Joe Biden's pro RIAA history [cnet.com] will almost guarantee it.
As Senator, Senator Biden had sponsored five pro-copyright bills and co-sponsored three. Among these bills includes the Family Entertainment and Copyright Act of 2004, of which the similar yet brutal 2005 edition became law. Another was the Perform Act of 2006, which intended to restrict the recording and playing back songs off satellite and internet radio (this died in committee).
Re:Sounds like mad men (Score:3, Informative)
"We don't care, you're fucked if we say so."
Re:Don't stop there. (Score:4, Informative)
Making that population statistically indistinguishable from those promoted by modern record labels, presumably?
A lot of people in any field suck at it, but in a field as big as music, even a tiny proportion of the artists being good would be enough to provide a lifetime's supply of interesting and entertaining content for people with diverse tastes. The trick is to somehow create a meritocracy where the relatively few really good performers can rise to the top and get widely noticed, without inadvertently creating Big Media all over again.
Re:Sounds like mad men (Score:3, Informative)
Hang your head in shame, Timothy.
Re:Sounds like mad men (Score:4, Informative)
I'm afraid that they'll insist this software runs on the TCM only, and that every personal computer has a properly operational TCM. Then if you've cracked your TCM, you'll be in much bigger trouble.
Re:Not only NO (Score:3, Informative)
Wrong venue perhaps, but the right spirit. I agree, let them say and propose what they want.
But, some ideas are so heinous they ought to provoke such a popular uprising that no one will ever dare propose them again. For instance, now that we have some understanding of the consequences, the idea of using nukes to "solve" disagreements between nations should be just such a provocation. There is a recent article out announcing that if the relatively minor nuclear powers India and Pakistan had a nuclear exchange, even the few nukes that they have is enough to cause a Nuclear Winter that could kill us all off. Generals who seriously propose using their nuclear toys without provocation deserve lynching by their own soldiers.
In other cases, time and time again special interests have proposed scrapping part or all of the Bill of Rights. They want to trash the 4th Amendment, or the 1st, or some other, to accomplish what they claim is some benefit to society, but which is patently, obviously the opposite. If they are lucky, no one takes them seriously, and we can afford to deal with them gently.
But in this case, these jokers have been pushing their anti-social agenda for decades, and have actually made some "progress". In some places, 3 strikes provisions, in which a mere unproven accusation is enough to cut access to a service steadily becoming more vital, have actually become the law. It's about the same as taking away driver's licenses or cars for littering. Real shame that the victims will be unable to drive to work and will lose their jobs, but they should have thought of the consequences before they broke the law! Yeah, right. They don't say so, but they want to kill the Internet as we know it. They'd love it if they could outright kill it, but they'll settle for strangling it with monitoring, restriction, and payment requirements. And for what? To protect us? No. Some other equally noble goal? No. It's so they can better monetize a non-essential thing the way they want, and what they want is to be lazy and not have to try or learn any newfangled business models. They ought to be mercilessly boycotted. Their reputation for business acumen should sink so low that no one will ever hire them for management work again. The opprobrium should be so severe that no sane businessperson will ever again dare suggest these sorts of drastic measures for this trivial thing.
The public understanding of the Internet today is somewhat like the understanding of nukes in the 1950s. Then, a nuclear war was not unthinkable, the dangers of radiation were not broadly known, and the possibility of Nuclear Winter was completely unknown.
Things to do to lose me as a customer (Score:5, Informative)
Charging extra for "digital download" for content I have already purchased a license for
Cable Companies that set the CCI bytes such that TV shows can't be transferred from one DVR to another
MPAA/RIAA/friends suing their consumers instead of getting with the program and adopting the new world that they find themselves in
Take away features with a software update
Re:Sounds like mad men (Score:4, Informative)
It's disgusting they can claim Star Wars never made a profit.
Re:Please don't mix RIAA and MPAA (Score:3, Informative)
And people like you completely ignore the fact that artificial scarcity is just that. Artificial. Blocking billions of people from using an idea or text, giving massive cultural enrichment, so that one (1) person can have additional profit.
People have been sharing since the dawn of time and will continue to do so. It's only human and no amount of hand waving by people like you is going to change that simple fact.
---
"I know that most men, including those at ease with problems of the greatest complexity, can seldom accept even the simplest and most obvious truth if it be such as would oblige them to admit the falsity of conclusions which they have delighted in explaining to colleagues, which they have proudly taught to others, and which they have woven, thread by thread, into the fabric of their lives." --Leo Tolstoy