Commerce Department Cool to CBDTPA 179
L. J. Beauregard writes: "Wired reports that the Commerce Department is not too thrilled about S.2048. Commerce Secretary James Rogan claims that 'the DMCA carefully balances the interests of all stakeholders,' a claim that marks him for a corporate whore, but it seems that there are some things even whores won't do."
Corporate whore? (Score:4, Insightful)
Still not safe... (Score:3, Insightful)
We keep recieving good news, but that doesn't mean we should slack off... it means that we should work harder and spread our message. Advocacy works.
Little Excessive (Score:5, Insightful)
Allright, now listen - I hate the CBBLAH & DMCA, etc like everyone else. But, come on now, is it REALLY necassary to call them whores when posting this news to the site? ATTENTION SLASHDOT EDITORS: it doesn't make you look very professional or worthy of respect when you result to cheap tactics like this.
Leave it to people like ME to call them whores but please not on the main page. it just doesn't give us a very solid position to argue from if you result to name-calling on the main page.
Re:Corporate whores? Indeed. (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Little Excessive (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Legislative Agenda (Score:2, Insightful)
I just rattled everyone I could in DC.
kevin.a.ryan@mail.house.gov is the Weiner Cheif of staff
and they are going to send a representitive tomorrow to
sit in on the committee, which is not their committee. Weiner is in
the IP subcommittee in the house of the Judiciary Committee, and this
committee in telecom of the commerce sub committtee.
I'm sending him an email with our position on DRM.
Our position on the Digital Rights Managment on the net is that
First, the government should not mandate any technological means of
assuring Digital Rights Management, and as INTEL said, this is the
problem of the MPIAA, and Music Publishers, and not an issue of the internet.
Secondly, all proposals of Rights management interfer with free competition in
the computer industry, and is contributing to the economic downturn of the internet
by preventing the use of Free Software and ordinary research and developement of
software to expand the use of media in the public at large.
Additionally, DRM, by it's nature, infringes on the 4th Amendment rights of the consumers who
own the media which they buy, and prevent it's normal enjoyment. All DRM schemes require prior
consent to use the property after a cpommon purchase. That is cpmpletely unexceptable.
DRM is an assualt on the educational system and public libraries, by preventing the free
disemination of information to the general public, stifling broad education, and further
disenfranchisong minorities which depend on public education for advancement into the society
at large.
DRM is an extortion racket....PERIOD
We have no use for it and will vote on this issue.
It's destroying the economy, disenranchising our children, crippling our tax base, preventing
competition, worsening the recesssion and targets Free Software, which was the engine which
propelled our economy all throughout the 1990's by making the internet possible.
If DRM is forced on us, and we can't use digital media for expression and education, and after
buying something, you find you can't read something after a limited time, or without an approved
hardware or software device, it is same as if someone banged down my door and stole my whole
CD collection and my Newspaper archive. It prevents me from using MY property and it destroys MY
business. My business is designing systems to read media and productively use information.
Lastly, the Telecom subcommittee should not even be conducting this session since the proper place
for this the IP subcommittee since this is an IP issue.
Re:Legislative Agenda (Score:1, Insightful)
The legisitlative assitiants have their own club in DC and Lamar Robertson has been in constact with a number
of the best people working on this agenda. We need to get people in DC to be available to testify at these
conference meetings because what we've learned is that the participants have NO IDEA about details of Copyright
Law and digital property rights, and they would LOVE to have our input, if it's done intelligently.
We need to also campain to defeat Hollings and make an example of what what happens to elected officials
who oppose private ownership of digital media and trample on our 4th Amendment rights.
Re:Ermm.. anyone else notice this part of the stor (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Nothing to get excited about (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Little Excessive (Score:2, Insightful)
when i read it first i was pretty shocked as to whether this was slashdot or some other web-crap.
1) let another person be in the wrong. i think it doesnt behoove us [submitter, editor , whoever] to react like that.
2) dont put yourself in the slime just because the other party is slime.
3) also remember responsibility is something that is proportional to the number of people involved. when you have thousands of people it really isnt nice to air sentiments like this publically.
4) it also dilutes the point. here we are discussing something totally different from the actual post which was relevant, important and DOES constitute news but delivered wrong.
5) i say my share of swear words but yes it _is_ relative and idealism doesnt hold water here. imagine the president standing up and swearing like hell in the speech or your parents doing that while they talk. you have to look a little further than your freedom if its going to turn a public nuisance
my sincere opinion. thanks.
V
Re:Technicalities (Score:2, Insightful)
That's one way of putting it, but from everything I've seen/read/heard about Rogan, he's a reasonable fellow. If I remember correctly, he was involved in the impeachment process because of his qualifications as a lawyer. It cost him his seat in Congress, if it makes you feel any better. One of those principle/duty versus practicality things. Doesn't bode well for those who think he's paid for.
Before you get on your high horse, you would do well to remember that it was your pal Slick Willie who signed the DMCA into law.
And Senator Foghorn Leghorn (Fritzie Hollings, the junior senator from South Carolina) is a Democrat, too. That said, there are many Republicans who support this bill. Would the president sign it if it got to his desk? Probably, unfortunately. Bill's biggest opponent in Congress? Patrick Leahy, a Democrat.
I think a big problem we've got here is that this isn't the kind of bill that's got the run-of-the mill congressman (like my undistinguished one) interested -- they'll vote whichever way the party leadership tells them to. Letters might help, but I think this is something that somebody important is going to have to pickup on, and sway quite a few votes. I'd focus on the senators whose states have the most to lose by open source development being hurt....
John Edwards and Jesse Helms, North Carolina
John Warner and George Allen, Virginia
Chuck Schumer and Hillary Clinton, New York
and so on....
And I'm not a member of either party...I belong to one of those third, so-called unimportant ones. If you're interested....click here [lp.org].
Hitler was elected into office. (Score:2, Insightful)
As far as I'm concerned, with the exception of environmental and science issues, the current government is better than life under Clinton. Having to deal with the likes of Boxer and Feinsten in the Senate is enough - no need to give them free access to the White House!
How bad is the DMCA? Getting around the DMCA? (Score:2, Insightful)
I should start by saying that I loathe the idea of the SSSCA/CBDTPA totally, since it would kill open source, and grant MS a monopoly as they
own the patent on DRM tech in computers. Well, more of a monopoly than they already have =)
But really, how bad is the DMCA (not CBDTPA)? Please correct me if I am wrong, but I don't think that the DMCA affects me personally, and
doesn't have to affect most GNU/Linux users.
It seems to me that most posters here talk of the DMCA as if it is something which is impossible to escape. Its not. No one here relies
on DVD movies, or the latest tasteless music from the record companies FOR THEIR SURVIVAL. There are alternatives. There is genuinely
free music from the 'net (mp3.com, etc), or an indie movie festival. Maybe ifilm.com. You can avoid being affected by the DMCA simply
by refusing to make use of protected content.
So, the movie studios and recording industry want the DMCA to protect their content.... Blizzard wants to protected their game server....
So what? Don't like it? Don't buy it, don't pirate it, and DON'T LISTEN TO/WATCH IT. You DO have a choice. Yes, that may mean not having
Tron 2 (when its out) or LOTR, or Warcraft 3 or whatever the latest fad is, but if you really want to take the moral high ground with
these people (media industry), simply crying "I like shiny things" wont help.
For the record, I do think changes need to be made to the DMCA to prevent future cases like the Skyralov case or the Felten case. These
are quite franly sickening; you should not be on dodgy legal ground just for doing encryption research. Some provisions need to be made
for this.
Otherwise, let them keep their stupid DMCA. =) It doesn't affect me, and it WONT AFFECT YOU IF YOU DON'T LET IT. =) The DMCA can ONLY be
applied to specific works, unlike say software patents for instance.
- MrMeanie
P.S. Personally, I use GNU/Linux almost exclusively. I am currently coding an open source program. (not affected at all) I don't have
any illegal MP3s on my system. (I like to take the moral highground and criticise the music recording industry
would be hypocritical of me to complain about their efforts to 'protect' their content if I had illegal music on my system) Despite
having a DVD drive in my computer, the only DVDs I have are cover discs from Linux format magazine. I have no DVD movies, because of
the DMCA and lack of fair use rights; to play a DVD any way I want (ie on Linux) I would have to break the law, therefore I boycott
them. I will continue to boycott any medium which disallows what is commonly called fair use. As far as I can see, I make use of NO
protected content, therefore the DMCA has NO effect.
Too bad... (Score:3, Insightful)
"Congress shall make no law"...
Every law passed (and there are thousands every year), at the state, local, and federal level creates a new crime and takes away some freedom. And people wonder why we are becoming a Lawyerocracy?
With the million or so laws on the books nationwide, it's IMPOSSIBLE for even the most law abiding citizen to go though any given day, week, month, or year without breaking many...
Which is slavery. The law should be simple, and understandable by all.
We are supposed to be a Republic, based on majority rule through representatives, with civil rights protected by a Constitution. Tell me, anyone, how the DMCA or CBDTPA serves the majority interest, or isn't contrary to the Constitution?
Re:Legislative Agenda (Score:2, Insightful)
The reason for this istwo fold:
First, the courts can not be depended upon to uphold
the constitution.
Secondly, the bulk of the common law and case law uses language which disadvantages the property rights of
individuals in regard to copyright, and considers fair use
ONLY as a defense against copyright violation. A statute
which reverses this language will affect every court case
by giving new language to work with.
Ruben