The Internet Power Grab 219
Maple Syrup writes: "Fast Company has an interesting article written by John Ellis about the power shift on the Internet, as large corporate interests use political means to take over what had been a populist medium. The most interesting material comes at the end: 'There are no grass-roots efforts on the Web. The Internet army, which is enormous, hasn't been engaged or conscripted.'"
beginning trend (Score:1)
Hasn't ANY of our senators and lawmakers been bought out to put businesses in their place and restrict them?
Re:beginning trend (Score:3, Informative)
I dont know about that guy. (Score:2, Funny)
Re:I dont know about that guy. (Score:2)
'There are no grass-roots efforts on the Web. The Internet army, which is enormous, hasn't been engaged or conscripted.'"
Apparently this person has never been slashdotted...
Bring it on (Score:1)
Re:Bring it on (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Bring it on (Score:4, Insightful)
There is indeed a grassroots opposition... (Score:5, Informative)
They are currently active in fighting the DMCA and Fritz Hollings' efforts regarding the CBDTPA, and lots more worthwhile stuff. I'd recommend you check out their site and get involved in any way you can...
Victory Gardens (Score:5, Insightful)
That's exactly the drawback to entities like the EFF, though; the ways in which one can get involved are usually limited to writing out a check, which is certainly useful but hardly motivational. And in no way will it rally the troops in the way Mr. Ellis seems to desire here.
(Mandatory disclaimer: I have tremendous respect for, and am greatly indebted to, the EFF. They perform a great service for this entire community on a daily basis and I'm not questioning their goals or motives. Just worndering aloud whether or not they fit the definition of a "grass-roots" movement into which the "internet army" could be actively conscripted.)
So while it's great to have rallying cries like this FastCompany article, perhaps what we really need are a few ramparts on which we can all stand, wave flags, and yell somewhat threatening slogans in French. Help me out here, folks. That is to say, in addition to all this writing -- either a checks to foundations or letters to government reps, what we really need are some good old-fashioned symbolic activities that, while not incredibly effective on their own, serve to get a large segement of a population involved in and excited about a movement on a personal level.
A perfect example, in my mind, would be the wartime "victory gardens" found in U.S. backyards during the first half of the 20th century.
So... any suggestions?
P.S. - Pardon any typos. Sliced my right hand on a piece of case metal while slotting a card this morning, so I'm down to pecking at keys with the left. Please mod this at (-1, Klutz) accordingly.
Re:Victory Gardens (Score:3, Interesting)
To support this point a little further, I like to quote Albert Einstein:
"I am absolutely convinced that no wealth in the world can help humanity forward, even in the hands of the most devoted worker in this cause. The example of great and pure characters is the only thing that can produce fine ideas and noble deeds. Money only appeals to selfishness and always tempts its owners irresistibly to abuse it. Can anyone imagine Moses, Jesus, or Gandhi armed with the money-bags of Carnegie?"
Though throwing EFF a buck isn't a bad thing...
Re:Victory Gardens (Score:3, Interesting)
Ya know, an EFF flag wouldn't be a bad idea at all.
I used to fly an American flag proudly -- no, I am not an American: I am temporarily in the U.S. on an H1B visa, but I have a great deal of respect for the principles espoused in the Declaration of Independence, Constitution, and the Bill of Rights. Americans can be forgiven the sin of pride when it comes to those documents. They may only contain words, but they're good words and sharper than any sword out there, to bend a cliche, and worth living by. The American flag, was, for me, a symbol of those words, and the beliefs they represent.
I no longer fly an American flag.
In recent times, it has become a popular symbol of perverse xenophobic nationalism and fear. It is flown by many a coward, cheerfully prostituting the rights their forefathers died for, for an illusion of security.
So, yeah, I'll renew my EFF membership (money's been kinda tight lately and I've been procrastinating), gimme a flag to fly, if only in my imagination.
Re:Victory Gardens (Score:2)
Re:Victory Gardens (Score:2)
Something like that.
Though, with regard to the constitution, I'm rather fond of asking people, "What part of 'Congress shall pass no law... do you not understand?"
Re:Victory Gardens (Score:3, Insightful)
I will grant you, that some of the things called victory gardens were more than token efforts, but most mainly served the purpose of causing their participants to "feel a part". That they were effective can be seen by the way in which they have been remembered. If they had actually been of significant use they would have been more widespread during the preceeding years of the depression.
Slashdot commentary is probably more similar to victory gardens than most other things. It develops emotional support, but doesn't do very much in a practical way.
Re:There is indeed a grassroots opposition... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:There is indeed a grassroots opposition... (Score:2, Interesting)
How's that for grassroots?
Re:There is indeed a grassroots opposition... (Score:2)
Argh! (Score:2)
Your senator's focus on corn means that he might actually listen to you about DRM, because to him it's a side issue. In contrast, Diane Feinstein or Fritz Hollings are deeply committed to their cause and will not be easily swayed by voters or contributions.
Re:There is indeed a grassroots opposition... (Score:2)
- Robin
Re:There is indeed a grassroots opposition... (Score:2, Troll)
What is needed is a large group of people who are not afraid of actually getting out there and
Nobody could stop a large (few thousand at
And in the very least, what the fuck could the government do if the entire tech sector turned up against big business all at once? Throw them all in jail? Heh, and watch the rest of the economy go down hill and leave the nation to rednecks and whitetrash? Fat chance. Imagine what the headlines would be "Colleges and universities around the nation shutdown due to seriou staff shortages after FBI raids. In addition, IBM, HP, Compaq, Intel, AMD, and a large number of other companies listed on the Nasdeq have had at least temporarily shutdown due to lack of employees."
They would have no choice but to give in to academia and science as a whole.
Re:There is indeed a grassroots opposition... (Score:2)
I am a Nerd not a Geek, there IS a difference ThankYouSoVeryMuch.
All can agree that corruption and restrictions against technology suck (if they don't then they definitely do not qualify under either heading of Nerd OR geek)
One the corruption was rooted out then something resembling figuring out the will of the majority could actualy be done, but until then it does not matter what political side yo are on, the chance of the congress critters giving anything resemblng a care in the world about you are none to nill.
Re:There is indeed a grassroots opposition... (Score:2)
They are currently active in fighting the DMCA and Fritz Hollings' efforts regarding the CBDTPA, and lots more worthwhile stuff.
Blah. If they wouldn't waste their donations on lost causes like the DMCA and (especially) the Felton case, then maybe I'd consider giving them some money. If you want to donate to a cause that actually has a chance of winning in the Supreme Court, try Eldred [harvard.edu]
Re:There is indeed a grassroots opposition... (Score:2)
If you are looking for interesting information on virtually anything there is almost always a good 'hobby' site out there. I have a small web site for dos game programming. Its free and the traffic is low enough for me to pay for with a 'consumer grade' package. Hundreds of thousands of other people do the same thing for topics that they are interested in.
Besides, can anyone name a site that went subscription only that still exists?
The dmca and other bad American laws don't stop you from putting up your own free site. Why should we expect 'for profit' corporations to do anything for free? If web ads weren't working, they have to try something else. but if you want free content you shoold help by providing free content for others.
The Constitution of the Internet (Score:2)
Copy Right By Me
Re:The Constitution of the Internet (Score:1)
Re:The Constitution of the Internet (Score:2)
Cluelessness of Government (Score:1)
So this is a shock? (Score:3, Insightful)
So now the RBOCs and ILECs sweep up the pieces for virtually nothing, and consolidate the landscape. This was obvious years ago.
Add the hegemony of the likes of Disney and Microsoft, and their political champions/marionettes, and we're all set for high-priced enslaved mediocrity!
Can you say Palladium? I know you can!
"Just a spoon full of sugar helps the medicine go dowwwwwwnnnnnn...."
Yes, criminal behavior is shocking. (Score:2)
But it's not all doom and gloom. As the medicine goes down, people WILL react. Alternet networks will be built to avoid the suck of Micky$soft. Why? Because the new unregulated oligarchy of Baby Bells, M$ (Mickey$oft), etc will be intollerable, even when compared with the former Ma Bell that would not let you do so much as hook up a modem. I got cable but it's mostly good for sucking down banner ads. This is stupid, and people will realize it.
Set up your DIY wireless or light based backbones TODAY. The other mediums are quickly being closed and that's why this lament is true: ... you might think that Silicon Valley would be organizing itself to fight back on the political front. But they're late to the game. And remarkably, they still haven't appealed to the public for support. There is no widespread public campaign to defeat Tauzin-Dingell. There is no widespread campaign to defeat the Hollings bill. And there are no grassroots efforts on the Web. The Internet army, which is enormous, hasn't been engaged or conscripted.
What do you expect to see, TV adverts on cable TV? What am I going to do, post bills up next to the local rock and roll concert advert? I suppose Sun/Apple/HP could run full page adverts in print magazines, kinda like the ONE BILLION dollars M$ spent promoting XP, but I'm not looking to comercial companies to protect my rights, are you?
And that brings up the cardinal point here: It's not about getting music or baseball games for zero cost, it's about freedom! I'm happy to pay the piper, as opposed to his publisher. I don't really care to listen to baseball, though I expect true freedom to have anyone able to broadcast a live stream from the stadium. What's most important to realize is that the aim of this legislation is to make someone else the owner of your computer. That is the only way to extract money from you in the end - to own the network from transmision to reception.
Re:Yes, criminal behavior is shocking. (Score:2)
I beg to differ (Score:3, Funny)
Re:I beg to differ (Score:5, Insightful)
The "movement" is a few actual activists (read, "people who get up off their ass and actually do something") surrounded by a large horde of greedy children who find it's a great chance to shoot of their mouth and get "free as in beer" everything. It's a movement that supports P2P (since it allows them to use others creations as they choose) while damning anyone who would take "their" software, modify it, and distribute the binaries without releasing the code.
Sure, the internet is moving from free to fee. That's because, despite popular belief, these services actually cost money. Bandwidth isn't free. Hardware isn't free. And the internet is rapidly proving that advertising isn't really all it was claimed to be. (since now the companies can better track ad results themselves).
Is slashdot free? For some, but those people get a big ass ad in the middle of the story and a banner ad the size of Mount Rushmore. Is Fast Company free? Sure. If you want the big banner ad there too. That's how they manage to afford to keep having a website up and running.
Do you really think John Ellis, when he wrote the article, did it gratis? Be real. He got paid and someone has to pay him. That someone passes the bill onto everyone else or gets money from advertising, public funding, or grants.
Here's the hint of the day. The people capable of getting things for free are the people also capable of paying for it, since they're the people whose ass isn't glued to a computer screen waiting for the latest p2p copyright violations to get to their system. They don't care that it's no longer free. What they care about it is that's reasonably priced. They can start their own pay service (read: "porn site") and quickly be able to afford all the nice pay things on the internet with a minimum of fuss. It's not hard work or rocket science. It's basic economics. Even Bucky Fuller realized that some things need to be paid for, just as some things are better to give away. You just have to know which and get off your butt and do it.
Them that do, have.
+5, Flamebait? (Score:2)
No one disputes that. If it costs, one should pay.
But what people are lamenting is not the oft-repeated TANSTAAFL, but the fact that marketroids are trying to suck dry a cow they didn't invent. They are looking around: "Look! An opportunity for profit! Let's take it!"
I would gladly pay for bandwidth, if the spammers paid proportionately to the bandwidth they use. I wouldn't mind as much paying for CD's, if they still cost the $7 or so the cost in 1992, instead of the $25 they may cost today. Has the cost of producing music grown so much in the last ten years?
In the end, it's us consumers being squeezed for the last penny, while the CEO's in the media and communications industry get their nine-digit bonuses, like the one at HP who got $157 million for the Compaq merger, and the one at WorldCom who got $340 million for nothing at all.
No, I don't mind so much it no longer being free, but I do care about being made a fool.
Re:I beg to differ (Score:2)
The internet grass movement is called the open source movement.
Yes, open source is a grassroots movement, but it was started long before most of us had internet access. I wouldn't exactly call it an internet movement...
Re:I beg to differ (Score:2)
If you just mean "number of people who support the open source movement, in word or deed", of course, then it would be a much larger number, but also a much less meaningful number. And France would still be larger, as now they would get to count all those who claimed to be patriots.
The Open Source movement is very important, but don't mistake that for being "very powerful".
consciption? (Score:5, Funny)
If anyone thinks they're conscripting me, I'll move to some other Internet in protest.
Re:consciption? (Score:1, Insightful)
Army? (Score:2, Interesting)
The fantasy of some socioeconomic revolution fueled by internet connectivity is naive at best. Geeks and techies are about as potent a political force as are sheep rangers in Manhattan.
The multinational corporations control everything about us and feel very secure in their poisition. Get over it.
You are full of shit, Jack. (Score:2)
The author of the article was trying to spur us into action. It's not enough to vote, we have to shout our opinions. If enough senators get letters from concerned geeks, we will be noticed. Remember the volume of letters sent in during the Tunney Act comment period following the Microsoft-DOJ deal? We can organize, we can make our voice heard.
The United States was founded by a rag-tag group of intellectuals leading a "grassroots army", an army that defeated a well organized and provisioned imperial army. The grassroots effort is central to American politics. If you do not believe this, then you don't understand what it is to be an American. If you live in the United States, you should be ashamed for having written such drivel.
It's a good thing you posted that anonymously, Mr. Valenti.
Re:You are full of shit, Jack. (Score:2)
This rag-tag "grassroots army" has power: we vote. Dollars can buy senators, but voters can depose them. If we make enough noise, they will listen.
The techie/free software/Slashdot crowds may seem large to us, but compared to the general population I suspect they're insignificant in size; Joe Sixpack doesn't seem to give a damn.
Besides I also supect you'd be trading one bought senator for another. You would need some draconian measures to stop things like that.
Remember the volume of letters sent in during the Tunney Act comment period following the Microsoft-DOJ deal?
And what exactly did that accomplish? Most of the letters were discarded as form letters.
The United States was founded by a rag-tag group of intellectuals leading a "grassroots army", an army that defeated a well organized and provisioned imperial army.
An imperial army operating on the end of a very long supply line, but that's another (and OT) discussion altogether.
The grassroots effort is central to American politics.
Maybe I'm being overly cynical here, but I've got the feeling that the dollar and whoever can provide it is central to (American) politics.
As much as I admire (as a NL citizen) the foundation of US politics like the constitution and the bill of rights, I think that the people who wrote them would be somewhat disappointed by their current implementation.
Re:You are full of shit, Jack. (Score:2)
Re:You are full of shit, Jack. (Score:2)
Re:You are full of shit, Jack. (Score:2)
How is the net useful without corporations? (Score:4, Insightful)
The real question is, how far should corporations be protected? The answer is no more than they are offline. A DDoS should be treated with no more severity than throwing a brick through a window during peak hours. The existing copyright statutes were plenty for prosecuting infringers. It isn't illegal to teach someone how to make an explosive, it is to tell them how to use it if your goal is nefarious. Thus there is no logical, let alone ethical, reason to outlaw academic research on copy restriction systems. That research actually benefits copyright holders because it makes them more informed customers.
I will say right now and get it over with WE ARE NOT AT WAR WITH ALL OF CORPORATE AMERICA!!!! The enemy is each and every copyright cartel in the country and those that wield their patents against us. You want to worry about an economic issue (Americans) worry about Bush's hypocrisy. Subsidize American corporations to the tune of $100B a year then protect them from foreign subsidized corporations. We do it, they do it. Corporate protection is about securing votes, not good capitalism. Remember kids, your friends at the LP oppose the DMCA and while the EFF is nice and all, it isn't trying to get people elected to remove that kind of bullshit from the USC. If this kind of issue really bothers you all, vote for the LP. It isn't pissing in the wind if they don't get elected in the next few cycles. The longer they keep getting on the ballot, the more people will see their name. If you vote for a lesser evil, you are still voting for evil. Remember that in the next election cycle (which is IIRC 2 months from now for many of us).
Mozilla and OpenOffice NOT Open Source Software (Score:2)
OpenOffice? Sun writes it. Sure the "community" may write SOME code, but Sun pays for the overwhelming majority of it.
Mozilla? Netscape sponsers it. Netscape pays engineers to code. I wonder what percentage of the code is Copyright Netscape (a whole owned subsidiary of AOL Time Warner)? 85%? 90%?
Open Source has had some incredible accomplishments (Apache comes to mind), but Mozilla and Open Office aren't among them.
Alex
Re:How is the net useful without corporations? (Score:2)
Do you even have a job, Mr. Anonymous Commie? Where do you think all that food comes from in the stores? Who do you think either signs your paychecks or pays the invoices you send out?
Fucking communist idiot.
The only way (Score:3, Insightful)
As I am doing with Mattel [sorehands.com], fighting back to make sure they are stung enough that they won't try with others. I hope that other companies that think about the same and realize that no matter how big they are, they cannot step on the rights of individuals.
Passive resistance (Score:1)
Peace! Connectivity! Protect the Internet!
What the hell is Linux then? (Score:1)
lolroflmoal
Anybody want to... (Score:1)
Re:Anybody want to... (Score:2)
Got any good ideas for how to avoid the perils of faction and the tyranny of the majority? The founding fathers of the USA had. Are you that good?
The Internet Radio grassroots movement (Score:4, Informative)
Even if you don't listen to Net Radio now, you might in the future. Sending a free fax doesn't cost you anything, apart from two minutes of your time.
So I urge you. Please. Prove this article wrong. Show that the grassroots movement is definitely still there.
Re:The Internet Radio grassroots movement (Score:2)
If you drop by their local office in person, they notice that. If you hand write a letter they notice a little less. A Phone call, a little less. A Personal e-mail, less notice. A form letter, they don't care. This is the order that they measure your commitment by.
Re:The Internet Radio grassroots movement (Score:2)
huh? (Score:1)
Ok, who's holding that gun then?
Free software has been around for as long as I can remember, long before I used linux. I got PD/Freeware stuff for my amiga, I dont think people will ever stop making freely available software. Not even if your extremely weird goverment overthere finds out to make some law, that could be life hard for GNU/OSS and other enemies of software coraporation. And this could actually be plausiable, since it seems like that govement of yours likes to protects its investors(investors, lobbiest whatever =).
So is the govement holding the gun? I dont get it =)
If yes, fire away. I dont think ANY thing would kill Freesoftware, the only thing that could happen was it would be criminalized to use it.
MasterCard shows how computers become consoles (Score:3, Insightful)
I got PD/Freeware stuff for my amiga, I dont think people will ever stop making freely available software.
How will you be able to make it if you can't afford a computer that will run it? How do you know that it won't cost 20 times more to get a "developer's computer" that can run binaries that have not been approved by the computer vendor? This is already the situation with the Xbox and GameCube, and it's pretty close to the situation with the PS2 (that is, until somebody reverses the I/O subsystem).
Scene: Computer store of the future.
Personal computer that runs only signed binaries: $500.
Personal computer that runs unsigned binaries: $10,000.
Tools for signing binaries: $1,000,000.
Look on Bill Gates's face once his company wields its DRM OS patent to control the entire industry: Priceless.
There are some things money can't buy. U.S. Senators aren't one of them.
Nothing to see here (Score:3, Interesting)
Same thing happens in real life. Consider small settlements with only a few people and a single general store. As the town grows the number of stores increase until big consumer interests see a profitable market. Then WalMart steps in and is soon followed by McDonalds, etc.
Sure these large stores (and web sites) drive the mom and pop shops out of business, but the reason for that is they can afford lower prices with a greater selection. The real problem is after all the competition is gone, they can raise prices to whatever they want.
P2P file-sharing networks might keep prices in check, but only for those who consider them competition (such as Listen.com). The xIAAs still consider them unlawful enemies of capitalism and are attempting to legislate them out of existence. Hopefully it will have as much success as Prohibition.
Re:Nothing to see here (Score:2, Insightful)
Yet look at the idiotic "war on drugs" that has been going on since the 1980's. They have about as much chance of winning this war as a snowball has in hell. But, they continue to pump billions of dollars into the program and fill the jails anyway. I think that the RI/MPAA's fight against filesharing will end up like the war on drugs in about 5 years.
Re:Nothing to see here (Score:2)
The main focus of the article is the fact that large companies are trying to take over the internet by legislation, and Silicon Valley bussinesses and internet users are not fighting back.
Re:Nothing to see here (Score:2)
In other news, soykaf is from the dark futures Shadowrun RPG universe created by FASA. Soykaf is the new coffee made from... you guessed it: soybeans. My actual sig is from the Sega console Shadowrun game.
Fairness and the new Frontier. (Score:2)
Re:Fairness and the new Frontier. (Score:2)
How long before the corporations start forcing people out of their houses without compensation to build on their land? Enough is enough.
You're about a century too late - the railroads did just that in the last half of the 19th century.
I fail to see the point (Score:1)
Do you also think books you order from Amazon should be free?
On the other hand, we are all part of a grassroot movement:
Open source software, helpful usenet articles, detailed personal webpages on everything from pruning trees to recompiling kernels...
If you disagree, just say so and I'll send you a bill for this comment
Morality of civil disobedience? (Score:1, Interesting)
Seriously, though, if you believe that corporatism on the Internet is evil and must be fought, then surely supporting an underground resistance movement to fight and deface the corporate internet presence is a valid response?
Consider -- you read something like Thoreau's commentary on civil disobedience [indiana.edu] and he basically says that paying your taxes under an unjust regime is in itself a crime, and NOT paying your taxes is a virtue. Now, considering that our options for resisting the corporate takeover are non-existent since laws and social institutions are in place to enable their power (ie: automatic deduction of taxes from income, which the government distributes to corporations as it sees fit (in other words, corporate socialism [washingtonpost.com])) there is no way to deny them the money they feel is owed to them, as Thoreau says he thinks we should do. In that sense, can we not regard this as theft as retalliate accordingly?
For instance, if a company is promoting immoral behaviour and has a web presence, is it not justifiable to go after their web presence, if this is the only way I can fight back?
(Don't mind me, I'm just trying to see how fast I can get "wrinkledshirt" into an FBI file.)
It isn't free (Score:3, Insightful)
Because for all the yelping and whining, they realize, like everyone else, that bandwidth and "content" (I hate that term) are NOT free, and that giving away a product is an inherently flawed business model that will cost jobs and good products.
People who want everything for free are indirectly supporting a minimum-wage, no-opportunity society where the only companies allowed to make money are those who charge for Internet access.
Want to see some of the cool sites/businesses on the Internet succeed? Great! BUY SOMETHING AND QUIT WHINING ABOUT HOW EVERYTHING ISN'T FREE!
Votes with dollars sometimes count just as much as votes with voices or ballots when it comes to the economy.
And so the end of free content nears.
There was never "free" content. It was just donated. "Free" content is only free if your time is worth nothing.
calls it "the counterrevolution": mature companies in mature categories striking back at Silicon Valley technology and the pricing-power collapse that it implies.
And they are doing this with employment and B2B purchasing *at least* as much as they are with on-line customers.
Their efforts are meeting with considerable success.
For now.
in the future ( through Internet-Protocol telephony ), all voice calls would be free.
No, they would be less expensive, and paid to someone else.
Voice calls are still not free.
but it is a measure of Hollywood's clout that California senator Dianne Feinstein -- formerly the mayor of San Francisco -- has cosponsored it.
Huh? She's a democrat senator from the state where Hollywood is. Hello? McFly?
may well pass both houses of Congress. That's real power.
Which is well-balanced by a certain pen at the other end of Pennsylvania avenue, and a gavel or three around the corner.
These days, their business depends on it.
What business? I thought everything was free?
Basic Rule of the Internet: Bandwidth is not free. Therefore content is not free. Period.
The Internet will continue to change business until it is totally dissimilar to what it is today. It will provide opportunity on a scale unimaginable 20 years ago for people to start and grow their own businesses, PROVIDED those who are served by those businesses participate without the incessant whining about having to fork over/cough up/shell out/plunk down a few dollars here and there.
Re:It isn't free (Score:2)
Votes with dollars can move mountains. Have you seen the Dow Jones lately? I hope Bush isn't choking on his arrogance too badly.
Re:It isn't free (Score:3, Interesting)
Huh? She's a democrat senator from the state where Hollywood is. Hello? McFly?
Fritz isn't. Hollywood is thousands of miles away but they have no trouble finding him to send their checks to. Isn't FedEx wonderful?
Remember what else is in California? Ever heard of Silicon Valley?
If the entertainment industry were to pack and leave Southern Califonia, they'd see a localized moderate recession. Living in Northern California, I don't have much of a problem with this.
If high-tech R&D / production has to leave the country due to CBDTPA, we'd see a major depression leaving the USA sliding towards Third World status. You'll see companies that still bother with the US market selling us dumbed-down versions of consumer products years after they get to Japan and Germany. California is one of the states that would be hit hardest as Silicon Valley became part of "The New Rust Belt"... a few years from now, high-tech types who didn't manage to emigrate would be looking at NOW as "the good old days".
The difference is between a cold and bubonic plague.
The other difference? The entertainment industry sends campaign contributions to Congress. High-tech companies are just starting to learn that they ought to do this.
Is Feinstein working in the interests of the majority of her constituents?
Certainly. However, in her mind, her votes are counted in campaign dollars. The people who made the mistake of electing her? To the best of my knowledge, she isn't the least bit interested in us.
If you hadn't combined politics and Internet business models in random chunks of the same post, you might have made sense.
Re:It isn't free (Score:2)
Electronics makers already adapt to a variety of regional laws. Many countries have different laws about the physical limits on Ham radios. So some radios have the ability to load the allowed spectrum map externally. That way they are always localized correctly to the country.
Now if the Hollings bill passes and is NOT ratified by the globalization crowd, a Canadian or Mexican manufacturer could sue the US under NAFTA. NAFTA says that a government regulation blocking imported goods must not be any more restrictive than necessary for the purpose. WTO makes the call, and they can strike down the law.
Re:It isn't free (Score:2)
CBDTPA will reduce performance due to requiring a query to the DRM for every file access. How else is it possible for a DRM to decide whether or not the process calling the file has "legitimate" access to it?
What's not to like about this?
I don't see this spreading anywhere outside the area where Hollywood paid off enough politicians. While the EU will accept stupid experiments in government from the US, there has to be something for this for the EU politicians and/or bureaucrats at least. And suddenly turning one's 12 msec HD into a 20 or worse HD msec based on the DRM hits on performance is not that something. Having the DRM under the control of a foriegn entity isn't that something, either.
More to the point, the EU and Asian government being able to derive a differential advantage for their electronics companies because the US Congress did something absymally stupid by simply refraining from passing a law... where is this a problem for the EU or any Asian government?
I see increased development costs for US hardware developers.
Perhaps massively increased hardware development costs. (gulp)
The ADC price goes way up. These are simple chips, just a few thousand gate-equivalents if that many. Put even a simple microprocessor core on the chip and that 50 cent part may be a $2.50 or $5 part. $2 parts and an extra $5 labor to include a parasitic function due to a stupid national law. Will DRM have to be custom-burned to identify each customer? Another labor cost.
Consumer electronics require LOTS of ADCs and DACs.
Also, do you know what this does to individual hardware hacking? These are parts currently available in uncontrolled form at RADIO SHACK. Imagine having to have a license and to fill out government paperwork in order to possess 1 and account for its usage or destruction.
Second, it's not that big a deal for hardware designers to incorporate a licensed protection technology. In the overall complexity of a powerful video card, for instance, this tech might add 5% to the complexity.
What good does this do the individual consumer? DRM even when working correctly is a limitation on the use of a computer. What incentive is there for an EU bureaucrat or politician who is not subsidized by Hollywood to tolerate this?
Electronics makers already adapt to a variety of regional laws. Many countries have different laws about the physical limits on Ham radios. So some radios have the ability to load the allowed spectrum map externally. That way they are always localized correctly to the country.
it's not the same thing. A US government mandated DRM would probably have to be burned in to the vendor chips before purchse to achieve CBDTPA or Broadcast Working Group compliance. This isn't like having a power supply good from 80-230 volts and simply chaning plugs between countries.
Now if the Hollings bill passes and is NOT ratified by the globalization crowd, a Canadian or Mexican manufacturer could sue the US under NAFTA. NAFTA says that a government regulation blocking imported goods must not be any more restrictive than necessary for the purpose. WTO makes the call, and they can strike down the law.
Now THIS is an interesting idea. Would US politicians pull out of NAFTA over this? Doubtful. There are many companies that find it useful. Not all are high-tech, a fair number have the traditional corporate lobbying setups with funding for "friends"... more money than the entertainment industry has for politics.
So NAFTA may be the weak spot in the Hollings law. Thanks.
Re:It isn't free (Score:2)
Now if for some reason they want to restrict you from even copying that useless encrypted block of bits (which is pointless - you could always mount the disk on a non-DRM computer) they would need to add a simple perm check in the disk, controller, or OS or all three. I don't think it would add even a millisecond. How long do the existing Unix permission checks take? I guess you know that the EU is working on the European Union Copyright Directive [eurorights.org] which among many, many other things enforces DMCA-style anti-circumvention law. I'll leave you to speculate on the motives of the decision-makers. The Hollings Bill would affect US markets, not US manufacturers. So if it really is cheaper to make non-DRM parts, and there really is a market for them, both US and non-US makers would make both flavors for both markets. If, as I suspect, it's cheaper to just make one kind, both US and non-US makers will make DRM parts for both markets.
Look at car safety - the US has high standards for side impact resistance and other things. This doesn't handicap US car makers relative to foreign car makers - anyone selling cars in the US has to meet the standards.
Of course this whole line of discussion sounds a bit out of touch in light of recent globalization - what is a US car maker anyhow? Honda in Marysville OH? Volkswagen in Mexico? Jaguar (owned by Ford, I think)?
If there's a need for regionalized DRM, imagine that Intel downloads the DRM program into the CPU and then blows a fuse, preventing further tampering. But I don't think there's much need for regionalization if the DRM is designed "sanely" - merely enable the optional playback of restricted content. The "insane" DRM, which tries to assess and control ALL content on the machine, would probably be regionalized because of its inconvenience if it ever exists. I hope so. So far the prominent cases are Metalclad, a US company that successfully sued Mexico for blocking them from dumping toxic waste in Mexico, and Methanex, a Canadian Methanol maker that is suing California for banning the MTBE additive in gasoline. It remains to be seen if the globalization crowd will ever oppose something like the entertainment industry. But if it decides to (for the sake of consistency, let's say) it will win.
Classic pattern (Score:4, Insightful)
The Innovation phase happened when the Internet first gained the attention of commercial interests (I'm not saying that this is technological innovation). The Growth Boom happened during the late 1990's. Lots of small companies try lots of different things. The Internet growth boom was particularly excessive and lots investments were made in nonsense ideas, and the feeding frenzy started feeding on itself.
These poor investments and hair-brained schemes lead to the Shakeout phase (which we are presently in), and the crap is washed away. But, not all is crap, and the good ideas and technologies survive the shakeout.
After the Shakeout comes the Maturity Boom, where the good ideas that survives from the Growth Boom come to fruition and are adopted by the survivors, which tend to be large businesses. This is a consolidation phase, and you can expect the large-caps to be throwing their weight around, and we will enter this phase sometime soon. Since large businesses aren't particularly innovative, they resort to heavy-handed tactics to consolidate power.
These economic patterns repeat at micro and macro levels.
Empowering the engineers (Score:1)
A possible answer (Score:4, Informative)
Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2002 11:40:47 -0400
From: Declan McCullagh
To: politech@politechbot.com
Subject: FC: Public Knowledge hopes to turn geeks into, well, geektivists
X-URL: Politech is at http://www.politechbot.com/
Bring in the geeks [com.com]
By Declan McCullagh
July 15, 2002, 4:00 AM PT
WASHINGTON--Gigi Sohn hopes that geeks have become so enraged by recent anti-piracy schemes that they'll finally want to fight back.
The 40-year old lawyer, head of the Public Knowledge [publicknowledge.org] nonprofit group here, plans to recruit ragtag band of technophiles and train them to become a corps of effective political activists on the Internet front.
To Sohn, this means seizing on widespread discontent created by the attempts of Hollywood and the music labels to curtail file-swapping networks while promoting sweeping new anti-copying laws and standards.
E-mail campaigns are easily ignored, and transforming online ire into effective political action is hardly a trivial task.
Geek armies have always been eager to vent in online forums and clog the e-mail inboxes of errant congressional types. As far back as 1995, over 50,000 peeved Netizens signed an electronic petition slamming the Clinton administration's privacy-invasive Clipper Chip.
[...]
POLITECH -- Declan McCullagh's politics and technology mailing list
You may redistribute this message freely if you include this notice.
To subscribe to Politech:
http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html
This message is archived at
http://www.politechbot.com/
Declan McCullagh's photographs are at
http://www.mccullagh.org/
Like Politech? Make a donation here:
http://www.politechbot.com/donate/
What isn't from Declan's post to politech is that Gigi has already raised $1.1M.
At last, we have the chance to work with something with at least the possibility of success.
No, $1.1M isn't enough so we can afford to sit on her asses and let her solve the problems for us. It's only a start. We're going to have to put our own time and effort into this or we won't be making a living in high-tech in the USA.
Will she spend the money she's raised on the heavy artillery we need to back up our grassroots efforts and make them effective? (fax servers, ad purchases, campaign contributions, a top-bracket political lobbyist, political consultants, etc.) We'll see.
The good news is that if those of us trying to make a living at high-tech do get in and pitch and Public Knowledge does the right things, we might wind up with our own lobbying organization line NRA and AARP, and we'll never have to worry about politicians not listening to us again.
Mutual reciprocity & the immorality of FSF / O (Score:2)
As for the internet, no one ever said everything was free. Certainly, bandwidth costs money. But the price for putting information on the net and having it broadly distributed is much cheaper than that via traditional means, and likely to go down in the future.
True, producing information -- or formatting already known information -- has a cost, in time, money, etc. However, there is a nice reciprocity feature of the internet, in that any one contributor to the internet invariably gets much much more back from the net than (s)he puts into it. I am posting this one post -- contributing my information, my logic -- to slashdot. However, I get much much more back than I could possibly give.
Re:Mutual reciprocity & the immorality of FSF (Score:2)
- Search for free software using all the tools and techniques a geek would use. Security through obscurity won't help here.
- Download it and make sure it really is Free Software and not a prank. Note the IP address.
- Get a warrant and make the ISP identify the user.
- Arrest and charge the user.
Variations:- Before arresting, sniff the user's traffic for a few months. You'll get tons of downloaders (who may or may not be worth prosecuting) and possibly find the source.
- After arrest, offer the user a deal: reduced sentence if he helps nab three more distributors. Or total immunity if he helps catch the software author.
Governments have been attacking clandestine networks since the dawn of time. The techniques are obvious. This type of law enforcement is shooting fish in a barrel. Why isn't DeCSS already hosted in such a place? Because there is no such place. US influence reaches more places than the internet does.Re:Mutual reciprocity & the immorality of FSF (Score:2)
Furthermore, any attempt to ban OSS / FS would surely be ruled unconstitutional; as would the government's bans on encryption had they gotten to the supreme court. The DMCA will also be ruled unconstitutional if a case gets to the supreme court.
Re:Mutual reciprocity & the immorality of FSF (Score:2)
They do not need 100% effectiveness to be effective. When a certain number of (DeCSS|Free Software) folks have gone to prison, the rest will not feel so invincible. At this point, the vast majority of us will give up - and it's childish bragging to pretend otherwise.
Public terminals are no problem. At the least, the government can seize all the equipment at the location under two different theories: evidence, and civil asset forfeiture. If they want to go a step further, they could arrest the owner(s) of the establishment and charge them under a variety of statutes. The net effect of these actions (which would never actually need to be taken) would be to convince public terminal providers to keep a clear record of who used what machine when.
But wait - I shouldn't have answered you so specifically. Rather, I'd like to convince you that if enforcing the Hollings Bill becomes a national priority, and violators are hiding behind X, whatever X is, the investigators will find a way to crush/remove/penetrate X.
As for non-US countries, there will be rough uniformity of law throughout the developed world. DMCA is coming to Canada and the EU, and probably all other developed countries via globalization. If the Hollings Bill is accepted by the globalization community (WTO) it will become effectively worldwide. If it is rejected, it will eventually have to be repealed in the US.
I agree, though, that if Free Software is legal in Europe and illegal in the U.S., which might be true for several years of transition period, it will be relatively easy and risk-free to obtain it in the U.S.
FWIW, I guess that something like the Hollings Bill will eventually pass, but will probably exempt Free Software and possibly all software. DRM is most effectively done in hardware.
Paying isn't bad! (Score:4, Interesting)
We have to stop saying: The Internet should be free as in beer, and start designing, specing and implementing payment mechanisms. They should be implemented in "our" browsers, and who knows, perhaps it could be a "killer app" that breaks MS monopoly.
Re:Paying isn't bad! (Score:2)
What I'm concerned about is the prospect that I will still have to pay to put my page up, but also any visitor will have to pay a third party (not me) just to see it.
Solve the problems. All of them. (Score:2)
Payment mechanisms would help fix the advertising model. But we also need to solve the last mile problem. And Copyright issues.
Once we have easy solutions for these problems, companies will have to implement them or be driven out of business by those competitors who do. We can't give them a choice to implement or stall -- we need to invent solutions that are so simple that the big guys could be beaten out by small business unless they come around to a new way of thinking.
Fortunately, time and the ongoing march of progress are on our side.
Re:Paying isn't bad! (Score:3, Interesting)
How about bypassing the web, heres a few ideas:
Re:Paying isn't bad! (Score:2)
Monopolies are bad, but thieves are nearly in the same league.
Scorecards? (Score:3, Informative)
Scorecards can also list Who is donating to the Congress critters and the people running against them, and how much they given each of the people running. Federal law requires that donation lists be made public, so it's just a matter of gathering the data, putting it in one place, and making sure as many people as possible know where it is by posting it on sites like /.
Re:Scorecards? (Score:2)
Note: many of the contributions of the entertainment organizations are done through law firms and other organizations. "Soft money" is covered.
If you're going to do a score card, see if you can find a smart political reporter from a major newspaper or other serious political type to ferret out ALL the money.
My grassroots movement (Score:2)
Fight evil corporate [yahoo.com] control of your words. Use the QingPL [slashdotsucks.com] and SlashdotSucks [slashdotsucks.com].
"Alterslash is illegal. And is violating copyright. And unfortunately, under the way US copyright law works they will probably get a cease and desist soon." - Hemos
Thats totally a copyright violation.... I wish people wouldn't steal." - CmdrTaco
(Broadcast) Radio: same thing happened in 1934 (Score:3, Informative)
Broadcast radio was pioneered by universities, amateurs, and visionary entrepreneurs. It started out as a sort of friendly enterprise. In fact, in the early days of broadcast radio, it was normal practice for radio stations to keep their transmitters off for one (randomly selected) day each week in order to make it easier for listeners to receive more distant stations.
Basically the Communications Act of 1934 represented a victory for the commercial interests.
The "educational" licenses that still exist at the low end of the FM dial are the bone that was thrown to the noncommercial interests.
Disney (Score:4, Insightful)
Mention Disney to most people and the first thing that will pop in their heads is lovable cartoons. They associate the word "Disney" with wholesome family entertainment. Most people will consider being associated with Disney as being a good thing.
When you call Fritz the "Senator from Disney" some geeks might get the message, but a hell of more people will get this message "The Senator is for family entertainment" and is something that will help him far more than hurt him.
Put the right spin on it. Point out that Fritz is spending a hell of a lot of time representing the intrests of an out of state company that made big donations to him instead of representing the intrests of the people who elected him.
There are only 6 Senators who can claim they are representing the intrests of the people in their state when they back Media Companies, the ones from California, New York, and Tennessee. If you don't live in one of these 3 states you have a damn good reason to make representating out of state intrests into a campaign issuse.
Wrong. (Score:3, Insightful)
No, 4. If Hollywood had a large rock on it, SoCal would go through a moderate recession.
WHAT HAPPENS TO THE CALIFORNIA ECONOMY IF SILICON VALLEY GOES OUT OF BUSINESS?
The difference... the entertainment industry knows that their only hope of preserving their business model is via buttering up Congress.
Now try explaining this to Jerry Sanders of AMD, for instance.
The high-tech industries have only started to figure out that what happens in DC affects all of us, and they're hoping they can spend a little money on conventional lobbying to straighten this all out.
Perhaps, say, Apple will get the idea when they suddenly realize that the only way they can legally manufacture computers the rest of the world will buy will be to move to anywhere but the USA... as they start scouting real estate in Canada and Ireland.
What's needed is a mass movement backed by serious corporate money from the people CBDTPA will hit hardest. Though in fact, if such a mass movement is to be effective, we're going to have to match the corporate donations out of our own pockets AND actually get off our butts and participate... when the mail from the mailing lists gets to us, click the URLs and send the faxes to Congress... when we're asked to volunteer to work in campaigns of people we despise who vote right on Hollywood control of technology, get out from in front of our computers and GO.
Your choices?
Re:Wrong. (Score:2)
Holywood donates lots of campaign $$$$$
Silicon Valley donates very little campaign $$$$$
Hollywood stars help raise campaign $$$$ at fundraisers.
Silicon Valley Nerds are worthless at fundraisers.
It costs a shitload of $$$$ to get elected and as long as Holywood outspends the valley their canidates stand the best chance of getting elected. Talk is cheap, campaigns aren't.
Sending Form letter faxes is a waste of time. They go in the trash unread and uncounted. Congress Critters get lots everyday from evry cause on Earth. They show little commitment, the only effort needed is clicking a button. If you want to really catch their attention drop by your Congress critters local office and tell the staff what you think in person. That gets more attention than thousands of faxed form letters.
Another biggie, If you don't vote, your Congress critter dosen't give a damn what you think.
Re:Wrong. (Score:2)
I Said representing the intrests of the people, Not representing the intrests of all the people or the majority of the people.
Then say what you mean, d00d. I fully agree, of course. :-)
Holywood donates lots of campaign $$$$$
No shit. However, if a substantial portion of us donate $10 at a time to a political organization that represents our interests and can get comparable corporate donations, our community becomes a major player. As I said, Public Knowledge has already raised $1.1M, $400,000 was from Red Hat's Center for the Public Domain. Yes, you read this correctly. Is Public Knowledge the organization that's willing to go out to kick asses and take names on our behalf? I'm going to keep an eye on them... because if they are, our choices are... make damned well certain that they and we win, leave the US to stay in high-tech, or enjoy flipping burgers. Silicon Valley donates very little campaign $$$$$
How many Silicon Valley high-tech suits read slashdot?
If you (as in any reader) is one. . . do something. . . read the CBDTPA and figure out what this does to your company's business model. What level of political contribution by your company is more cost-effective than going out of business or relocation outside the US with core personnel?
Hollywood stars help raise campaign $$$$ at fundraisers.
Let's separate this into music and TV/movies. TV/movie actors know they depend on their industry for survival. We can't make Hollywood movies of the sort that people are used to seeing without their infrastructure, which is a lot more than a MacG4 and a few kilobucks of specialized video stuff. So they'll say what their bosses tell them to say.
Musicians who work for major labels know they're taking it up the ass without Vaseline and that if the stranglehold over distribution and exposure held by RIAA labels is broken, they'd make a hell of a lot more money playing better music. The general record-buying public knows this. So you might be surprised at the number who might be willing to do fundraisers and participate in media events in order to ratfuck their suit bosses and get people elected willing to blow up this monopoly. Do you think people's favorite musicians saying "This Congressman is voting to rip me off" would get a bit of attention?
Silicon Valley Nerds are worthless at fundraisers.
How good can you get at fundraising if the alternative is McDonald's?
It costs a shitload of $$$$ to get elected and as long as Holywood outspends the valley their canidates stand the best chance of getting elected. Talk is cheap, campaigns aren't.
No shit, Sherlock. You ready to open your wallet? I'm willing to open mine. All I need is an organization willing to help us put together the kind of hardball, bareknuckle political fight that's our only alternative to losing the high-tech sector and I'm there. Are you?
Sending Form letter faxes is a waste of time. They go in the trash unread and uncounted.
They get counted. They also have a certain annoyance value to them in the offices that still run paper fax machines... which gets attention, and also remember that you're tying up about 90 seconds of fax line for every fax. The ACLU still wins occasionally despite their popularity. This is because they can dump tens of thousands of faxes on Congress from actual constituents at will.
Also remember that unless your message is accompanied by a substantial check or you have a track record of campaign contributions, counted is the best you can probably do.
Remember that unless you have an excellent grasp of the issues and can present them effectively in person, we're better off if you don't go further than making a phone call saying "vote NO on CBDTPA" to your local Congresscritter's office. How many geeks are good at doing this in person? Explaining non-tech issues to the not-especially interested clueless?
Congressional staffs use their incoming fax for things besides hearing from constituents. Also remember that on some issues, the only comment from a constituent either way might be on something the elected official has no particular feelings either way because nobody on either side of the issue donated him any money.
E-mail goes into the bit-bucket. There's no doubt about that. Don't bother with paper mail, the anthrax scare means that letters can be delayed for months if they get there at all.
Congress Critters get lots everyday from evry cause on Earth. They show little commitment, the only effort needed is clicking a button. If you want to really catch their attention drop by your Congress critters local office and tell the staff what you think in person. That gets more attention than thousands of faxed form letters.
Also true. However, for every person who drops into a congressman's office, a thousand people might be willing to point and click to get a fax sent. A mass movement is about many different kinds of people with many different levels of committment and time. Those who only have a few minutes they can spend need to have their contributions harvested, too.
A thousand faxes means 1,000 people who have stated positions on a specific bill. Piss off enough thousands of people at a time by ignoring them, and one is likely to have to look for an honest job.
The Web-to-fax setup is a useful tool for mass movements... and if we're going to continue doing high technology, we as a group are going to have to figure out how all these tools work. Or meet in expatriate gatherings in Ireland and Canada and Holland and Germany lamenting the good old days back when there was American high-tech.
It's single-issue politics time, and the issue is survival.
Re:Wrong. (Score:2)
Getting Getting $100 checks from indiviuals is nice, but has ZERO effect on postions. They are from people who either allready agree with your postions or who hate your opponant.
Most Campaigns don't give a flying fuck about tech issuses, one way or the other so they are open to having a postion developed for them and $$$$ talks. The MPAA can send an airheaded bimbo with a big name and big hooters to attend a $1,000 a plate dinner that will raise me half a mill in one night. Some nerd isn't going to bring in a bunch of people willing to shell out a grand to oogle his ass, so guess who has the advantage in catching the ear of the campaign when it's time to develop a postion paper on CBDTPA? Want influance? Make damn sure you can deliver half a million $$$$ in one night.
We need an organization that is concerned with fundraising and lobbying, one that can deliver every thing from $$$$$ to unpaid labor for campaigns. Most important of all one that can deliver the goods on election day, votes, blocks of votes. That means things like calling nerds on election day reminding them to vote, arranging rides to the polls and any other damn thing it takes.
Re:Wrong. (Score:2)
Exactly correct.
Same John Ellis? (Score:4, Interesting)
I can't find any confirmation as he appears to be trying to hide his history, but the tone of the article, and the subjects of his other comments seems to point to that conclusion.
Reading the column it seems to be a case of someone trying to manipulate people by playing off their hot buttons. It's pretty standard political boilerplate opinion column. Reading through his blog I see a variety of the same.
Anyway, I guess the point is, it's good to know whose opinion it is you are reading. This certainly appears to be the same John Ellis, and I personally would not trust him to have my interests in mind.
Re:Same John Ellis? (Score:2)
And yes, I figured out fairly early on that this was a different John Ellis, although I had to admit to a bit of mental whiplash when I first saw the name.
Wake up call! (Score:3, Insightful)
Here's a clue: The power in America resides with those who control the law making process _and_ have control of the means to enforce the laws, that is, fine, lock up, or kill.
The phrase should read, "Of the people, by the government, for the big business interests" which seems much more accurate of our historical reality. The really, truely sad thing is this has been true for so long and folks just don't want to acknowledge it.
Another phrase comes to mind which could be more accurately modified: "Those who ignore history are screwed."
Ancient Greece, representative democracy. Rome, representative democracy for most of its existence. Ever wonder why the representative democracy types get so rankled when direct democracy is discussed? Have a clue yet? Ever wonder why those great states died even with the supposed strength of democracy? Here's a hint: The word "corruption."
Wake up, time to get a clue!
Sorry if I sound sarcastic, it's not my intent here.
So what ? (Score:2)
Free to Fee isn't happening (Score:4, Insightful)
In an area that I follow, access to financial data, Edgar Online bought up most of the other services that reprocessed and indexed SEC filings, such as FreeEdgar. Then they introduced pay services and mandatory registration, moving away from a service funded by DoubleClick ad revenue. They're still losing money, and their stock is down from a high of around $20 to $1.71 today. The free services that compete with them, including mine, are doing fine.
The article mentions a service that charges for online access to baseball game audio feeds. If that thing makes money, I'd be surprised. If it has more than a few thousand paying customers, I'd be surprised. Major League Baseball as an organization has been in financial trouble recently. This sounds like a "maybe we can make some extra cash on the Internet" thing.
Charging for marginal content on the Internet seems to just be a phase companies go through right before they go bankrupt.
UK grass roots opposition (Score:3, Insightful)
This mobilisation took just one week, and was incredibly effective - the use of fax means that the MPs treat it like a letter. My MP has sent me two letters in reply and followup, including the weasel words sent out by the government after they completely backed down.
See also www.faxyourmp.com, which makes faxing your MP as easy as sending an email - very, very smart idea to bypass the way that email is sometimes perceived by MPs as 'too easy to send, so not worth reading'. And every MP reads faxes even if they don't have an email address...
Re:Wahhhh!!! waaaaahhh!!! (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)