Slashdot Log In
Digital Media Consumer Rights Act
Posted by
Hemos
on Mon Feb 03, 2003 06:00 AM
from the changing-the-dmca dept.
from the changing-the-dmca dept.
irabinovitch writes "Representatives Rick Boucher and John Doolittle introduced the DMCRA which would to quote the EFF would "require labelling requirements for usage-impaired "copy-protected" compact discs, as well as several amendments to 1998's infamous Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA)." We always seem to complain about the DMCA around here now is our chance to change it! Check out this "Action Alert" at the EFF."
Related Stories
[+]
Politics: Fair Use Bill Introduced To Change DMCA 152 comments
An anonymous reader tips us to a Washington Post blogger's note that Representatives Boucher (D-VA) and Dolittle (R-CA) today introduced the FAIR USE Act to update the DMCA to "make it easier for digital media consumers to use the content they buy." Boucher's statement on the bill says, "The Digital Millennium Copyright Act dramatically tilted the copyright balance toward complete copyright protection at the expense of the public's right to fair use..." The Post failed to note the history. Boucher has been introducing this bill for years; here are attempts from 2002 and 2003. The chances may be better in this Congress. And reader Rolling maul writes in to note Ars's disappointment with the bill for leaving the DMCA's anti-circumvention provisions intact: "Yet again, the bill does not appear to deliver on what most observers want: clear protection for making personal use copies of encrypted materials. There is no allowance for consumers to make backups of DVDs, to strip encryption from music purchased online so that it can be played anywhere, or to generally do any of the things that the DMCA has made illegal."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Digital Media Consumer Rights Act
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 156 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
A very valid point... (Score:3, Informative)
I'm happy to say that in Holland, policies are a bit more consumer-centered.
Re:A very valid point... (Score:5, Informative)
On top of that, we will have to deal increasingly with directives from the European Commission. This body is (sadly) of low democratic alloy. John Q Public does not have easy access to them, or even have a say in who sits in that committee, but you can be sure that industry lobbyists have found their way to these people.
But I agree, it is very good to see politicians look at the current laws and proposals with different eyes, and asking "Where are the consumer rights in all of this?".
More to do with (Score:3, Interesting)
Now on the other hand, we should vote with our wallets and not buy copy protected music CD's that SUCK! especially in cheap ass car CD players...
TQ
Re:More to do with (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:More to do with (Score:5, Interesting)
True, but unless something like this passes, we won't have a chance to know which discs are crippled. Personally I am already voting with my wallet. Since I got the first crippled album that wouldn't play in my computer's CD burner at the time (the only CD player I had) back in 2000, I haven't bought a single CD, since there is no way to know which ones are broken.
Re:More to do with (Score:5, Interesting)
This is about more than just CD labels, it's about regulations on both production and fair use.
I had a big discussion with some friends the first time [slashdot.org] this bill was introduced. My friend is a liberitarian who thought we should not be introducing new industry regulations (forced labeling) in music.
I disagree with that argument for 2 reasons. Fist of all, crippled discs that are not labeled are basically illegal anyway since they are being falsely advertized as regular CDs. This may be a new regulation, but it is a reedundant and minor 1.
Secondly, the main focus of the bill is on deregulation (and thus should appeal to liberitarians). The DMCA currently prohibits consumers from 'unencrypting' crippled CDs. It also prohibits production of hardware or software that breaks cpoyright encryption on these CDs. This bill will remove those regulations.
Re:You're both right (Score:4, Informative)
Good question. There are two answers.
First, the Philips/Sony "CD/CompactDisk" logo (used under license) is an indication of complience to certain standards that do not support such crippled disks. To use that logo on a crippled disk is (a) a violation of the logo license (according to Philips, at least), and (b) fraud.
This leads to the second answer. You may be asking, "Yes, but how exactly is it deceitful?". The consumer did not contract as to what that logo meant, so why should the supplied be held to that standard? The law generally deals with what "a reasonable person" would understand, in the absence of a specific agreement (contract). After years of purchasing unencumbered CDs, a "reasonable person" would assume that something that looks like a CD, is labeled as a CD, is sold as a CD, is, in fact, a CD, as he understands it, i.e. unencumbered. The logo, in fact, is meant to butress this understanding. Selling a crippled CD without labelling to indicate that it is crippled is fraud, pure and simple. Even if the "CD/compacd disk" logo were missing, you could probably argue sucessfully that it is fraud, simply because "a reasonable person" will presume a shiny flat disk with music on it is a CD, in the absence of anything to suggest otherwise.
The danger, though, is that "a reasonable person" may not know just how encumbered or unencumbered certain future media are, and so will will be oblivious to the fact that his fair use rights are eroded further and further over time. CDs just came at a juncture where digital copying was still difficult enough that digital piracy wasn't a big issue, so little protection. DAT decks, if you recall, had to have SCMS: Serial Copy Managament System, which permitted only one copy from a digital source -- the watermarking alternative pushed by the RIAA in Congress stalled DAT introduction in th U.S. to the point that consumer DAT technology was stillborn.
What can I do... (Score:5, Interesting)
Daniel
Re:What can I do... (Score:5, Interesting)
There is a music/movie store here that sells real import DVDs and CDs, but at USA prices. Given that those prices exceed the monthly pay for most people here, they don't sell that many!
And, yes, I too was unemployed in the USA before I came here. I'd like to be back there, but stuff like the DMCA makes me think twice.
This is gonna be fun to watch. (Score:4, Funny)
Needed (Score:1)
Good Start (Score:5, Insightful)
Past that, we should also, as the EFF states, tell our families and friends about the issue. Not many people care about this currently, because not many people know, and the information sources most people rely upon are more concerned with 5 minute wheather reports than reporting on people's rights being stripped away.
It's easy to get them to care (Score:5, Interesting)
Right, they want fascism (Score:5, Informative)
The RIAA, and other business groups looking for help really want our government to slowly become a bit more fascist.
Such a shame that few people understand and respect liberty, and are willing to eliminate personal liberty to do what they think is right. The GOP tends to slip towards fascism when they run out of ideas, the Democrats slip towards socialism... the Libertarians speak out for liberty, but they keep letting cooks talk...
Alex
Wishful thinking (Score:1, Troll)
Government at work... (Score:5, Interesting)
"If pro is the opposite of con, what's the opposite of progress?"
If nothing else, I have to laugh at the proposed name (DMCRA). It's a poignant acronym, with just the right amount of "ha-ha" expected. Once again we have the pols battling it out against each other, with the target result being to counteract each other. For once, I hope this is achieved. To counter the DMCA with the DMCRA would raise my spirits for sure.
Thank you, Rep. Boucher, for raising a subtle yet interpretable middle finger to the DMCA (and for your other clueful work). If ever I meet you, I owe you a drink, and that's a promise
Re:Government at work... (Score:5, Funny)
List of Co-Sponsors of HR107 (Score:5, Informative)
Rep Andrews, Robert E. - 1/29/2003 [NJ-1]
Rep Bachus, Spencer - 1/7/2003 [AL-6]
Rep Barton, Joe - 1/29/2003 [TX-6]
Rep Doolittle, John T. - 1/7/2003 [CA-4]
Rep Kennedy, Patrick J. - 1/7/2003(withdrawn - 1/28/2003) [RI-1]
This is a secondary soluytion (Score:2, Interesting)
We have one section of government (RIAA) working one set of laws to take away digital rights
And now we have another working to attempt to bring them back. Does that make sense?
Putting all the effort into having one continuously working against the other in the hope there's a middle ground that is safe doesn't seem sensible
working departments together would be the best option. I don't see why this can't be done
RIAA != Government (Score:4, Informative)
damn, sucks to be canadian. (Score:3, Informative)
Link to EFF (Score:5, Insightful)
Make sure to write your representatives. It's the only recourse we have left in this 'democracy' that has gone afoul - The only reason it has gone afoul is that WE (American Citizens, not slashdotters) have allowed it to but NOT writing our representatives. Their title 'REPRESENTative' should say it all. Their SOLE purpose is to represent YOUR opinion to the people that make the laws that govern how our lives are lived. If you don't write - LAWS WON'T CHANGE. The EFF has made this task incredibally easy - They've even written a nice letter and will auto-lookup your representative based on your address. Get your opinion out there. It's our only chance to change the laws of the land we live in.
I'll give you the link [eff.org] again in case you missed it the first time.
Its about time (Score:1)
Though I am not a US citizen, I am very much interested in this as most of the laws get exported from the US to other countries.
Sadly (Score:1)
The RIAA/MPAA lobby machine will start working against this bill and one of two things will happen, it will fail miserably or it will be so watered down as to be unrecognizable and worse will do exactly opposite of its original intent.
If you're not with us, you're against us. (Score:5, Insightful)
Labelling Won't Work (Score:2, Interesting)
What is pertinent is that DVDs are labelled in this country - they have logos on the rear of the covers that indicate region protection, macrovision etc. and people still buy them.
I don't know what you guys in the US have on your packaging, but over here ours are labelled already and the consumers don't care.
FYI: Link to the bill... (Score:4, Informative)
Don't forget my man! (Score:4, Informative)
Spencer Bachus [arl.org], my representative, is also cosponsoring the bill. This is a real turnaround for him, as he has usually voted for whichever side of the issue is commercial. We've had several e- and snail mail arguments about electronic freedom issues, and his cosponsorship of this bill demonstrates that he is doing just what his job title indicates - representing.
A big attaboy to my man Bachus for pitching in on this! Let this be an inspiration to anyone else out there who believes that getting involved is hopeless - if you speak, they will listen.
Already legally required (Score:2)
If it says it's a CD, it doesn't have copy protection. If it says it's a CD and has copy protection, then they're violating Philips' trademark, and can expect a call from the lawyers. Very simple, and no new legislation needs be introduced.
Unfortunately, nobody reads labels like that anyways.
They've missed out an important bit! (Score:5, Informative)
I vaguely recall, during one of the DVD cases, that it was stated in court that the DMCA does NOT forbid breaking copy protection for fair use at the moment.
The PROBLEM is that it forbids distribution of tools for breaking copy protection, regardless of what they will be used for. Having permission to break the protection for fair use is no good unless you are actually able to do it, and unless the tools are distributable very few people who wish to make fair use will be able to.
This is exactly the problem that came up in one of the appeals in the DVD case; that it is not sufficient to simply ensure that people are permitted to make fair use, because even if they have permission, "nothing in law obligates manufacturers to make it easy for people to exercise fair use rights" (paraphrased from the appeal verdict). Thus, they can simply make it so hard that the vast majority of people can't do it, and the tools distribution clause will prevent people who CAN do it from helping others do so.
To ensure fair use, the proposed act would have to include a specification that no IP owner must unduly impede the exercise of fair use rights, technologically or otherwise. If technology is too restricted at the moment to do this without losing protection against illegal use then, well, they're big companies with big bucks: they can innovate new technology, or at least sponsor others to do so. (At the moment, such technology is unlikely to ever get developed because it's actually to the firms' advantage for it not to be - they can carry on getting away with blocking everything.)
First it was cigarettes... (Score:2, Funny)
In another few years, there'll be so many warning labels we'll have to play 20 questions with the clerk to figure out what's in the box.
Is it known in the state of California to cause drowsiness?
No.
Is it car headlights?
No, that would be known in the state of Hawaii to cause blindness.
Oh yeah. Umm...
Not a good enough name... (Score:3, Funny)
What it needs is another couple of letters on the end. How about c and k? C could stand for 'concerning' and the k could stand for... well shit, I'm not that intelligent so I'll get to the point. I just want the acronym to be 'DMCRACK'.
Intel, Apple, HP, Microsoft, Adobe Must Fight This (Score:1)
While bills like this are fun to read, they have effectively no chance of becoming law because the chips you buy from Apple and the salsa you buy from Adobe and Time Warner keep the the bars of your cage strong.
You have three choices:
1) Stop funding anti-human corporate monsters.
2) Eject money from politics (good luck).
3) Give up your pathetic, futile strivings for freedom and accept once and for all the yoke of your corporate masters.
- Glin
The best way to get this passed... (Score:2, Interesting)
For those in the crowd who are uncomfortable with these tactics, just remember, the other side has been doing this for years, and have no problem with continuing. We didn't start this war, but if we don't start getting in the trench and fighting the battle as they are, we are sure to lose it.
Don't use their form letter; use mine! (Score:2, Insightful)
Congress has a responsibility to right this situation and the Digital Media Consumer's Rights Act (DMCRA, H.R. 107) is a step in the right direction. I hope you will co-sponsor the DMCRA and show your support for the public's rights in digital media.
Thank you for your time.
DeMoCRAcy in action... (Score:1)
Wish Rick's campaign took PayPal (Score:2)
Full Text of the Bill (Score:1)
Re:Uncharted Territory... (Score:1)
there are already enough places where you can't speak your mind and are flooded with regulations bordering the ridiculous.
Re:Uncharted Territory... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Uncharted Territory... (Score:5, Insightful)
What? You want to change this? Why?
Right now, many things are illegal, but the laws are deemed unfair, so these things are socially acceptable
Damn straight. And once those absurd laws are gone things will balance out.I don't want the internet to speak with a singular voice. What a horrible thought. That would turn it into network TV or a clear channel radio station.
Re:Internet as a stable area.... (Score:1)