Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
The Internet Your Rights Online

Look Inside A PC-killing WIPO Treaty 514

Posted by timothy from the your-life-is-their-playpen dept.
mouthbeef writes "The Broadcast Treaty is a proposal from a WIPO Subcommittee that's supposedly about stopping 'signal theft.' But along the way, this proposal has turned into a huge, convoluted hairball that threatens to make the PC illegal, trash the public domain, break copyleft and put a Broadcast Flag on the Internet. The treaty negotiation process is unbelievably convoluted and hard-to-follow, and they've just wrapped up the latest round in Geneva. But for the first time, a really large group of "civil society" orgs were accredited to attend. Me and another EFF staffer and the Coordinator of the Union for the Public Domain created a heavily editorialized impressionistic transcript of the meeting (EFF mirror, UPD mirror), trying to untie the knots in the negotiation. This is the first time that a really exhaustive peek inside a WIPO treaty negotiation has ever been published -- get it while it's legal!"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Look Inside A PC-killing WIPO Treaty More

Look Inside A PC-killing WIPO Treaty

Comments Filter:

  • DUPE! (Score:4, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 09, 2004 @03:28PM (#9381287)
    "This is the first time that a really exhaustive peek inside a WIPO treaty negotiation has ever been published -- get it while it's legal!""

    Unfortunately, I already beat you to it! [slashdot.org] and most of the links you mention were alreayd mentione din comments. All I have to say is... if you're going to have an email address so that subscribers can let the editors know of dupes, atleast READ the email you get on it

    Signed,
    AC

    • Why subscribe? (Score:3, Insightful)

      by bonch ( 38532 )
      I seem to recall subscribers were supposed to be a part of the editorial process, able to e-mail the editors with corrections and dupe alerts.

      Has this even happened? The editors here are notorious for operating in a black box, rarely answering e-mails at all.

      • Re:Why subscribe? (Score:3, Insightful)

        by LostCluster ( 625375 ) *
        As a subscriber, I've seen red-barred stories have clear mistakes in them, that end up getting repaired before the story goes live and becomes visible to normal users. I've also seen some outright bad stories go up for subscribers and then get pulled from the queue never to be seen again.

        Overall, I'd say that they're at least looking at the DaddyPants e-mail account... but a complaint should have a hyperlink citation backing up what you claim if you want any hope of them taking action.

  • Hooray for the UN! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by penginkun ( 585807 ) on Wednesday June 09, 2004 @03:31PM (#9381312)
    Boy, it's obvious the UN isn't in the pocket of the Big Corporations, yessiree!

    Will they outlaw ink and paper next?

    • Re:Hooray for the UN! (Score:5, Informative)

      by csbruce ( 39509 ) on Wednesday June 09, 2004 @03:48PM (#9381507)
      Boy, it's obvious the UN isn't in the pocket of the Big Corporations, yessiree!

      No, the UN is worse. It's $10-billion oil-for-food scandal makes Wall Street accounting foibles look like kiddy play. This follows directly from Bruce's Law: All unaccountable organizations are corrupt.

      • Re:Hooray for the UN! (Score:4, Informative)

        by csbruce ( 39509 ) on Wednesday June 09, 2004 @04:21PM (#9381803)
        Here is some interesting reading [nationalreview.com]. Just Google [google.com] for it. It's funny how you don't hear much about this on the nightly news. If it's not bad enough that the UN is a sprawling bureaucracy that burns through billions of dollars a year and can always be counted on to sit on its ass while tens of millions of civilians are murdered by their own governments, it still maintains a petina of legitimacy among those who like to maintain their comfortable illusions. Just listen to how dogmatically its apologists defend it. "It must be good... because it must be." It's only real contribution to the world is to provide a meeting place for representatives from around the world to talk. But surely a tables and chairs can be had for less than the UN's annual budget.

        • that's no critique. (Score:5, Insightful)

          by metalhed77 ( 250273 ) <andrewvcNO@SPAMgmail.com> on Wednesday June 09, 2004 @06:31PM (#9382783) Homepage
          You have not demonstrated that the UN is sufficiently worse than all the governments underneath it. The UN is no worse than any nation-state, in fact it occasionally goes to those areas of the world the US is so reticent to participate in like africa and provides minimal support. Minimal it may be but it's better than what the US ever does.

          You wanna talk UN don't restrict your debate to Iraq or whatever, talk about the whole UN and talk about what the world would look like without the UN and why it would be better.

          Anything less is simple finger pointing.

          Your arguments are shallow, and a wholesale indictment of the UN would need to be hundreds of pages of foot-noted text. Don't insult my intelligence with this cheap wankery. Since I'm not the one making the ridiculously shallow claim the burden of proof doesn't rest on me.
        • ...If it's not bad enough that the UN is a sprawling bureaucracy that burns through billions of dollars a year and can always be counted on to sit on its ass while tens of millions of civilians are murdered by their own governments, it still maintains a petina of legitimacy among those who like to maintain their comfortable illusions. Just listen to how dogmatically its apologists defend it. "It must be good... because it must be." It's only real contribution to the world is to provide a meeting place for r

      • . . . to its members. That's why you always hear about them voting on resolutions. It's screwed-up because a lot of its members are screwed-up.

        People who bash the UN don't seem to realize that there's no alternative. There's only one "everybody." I guess you could disband it, but sooner or later you'd need it again.

        You'd need an organization that represents the whole world (not just people who are or could be accused of being in your pocket) to endorse your plan for Iraq. You'd need the help of

    • Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)

      by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Wednesday June 09, 2004 @04:14PM (#9381742)
      Comment removed based on user account deletion

      • Thanks, Henry David Thoreau! (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Rimbo ( 139781 ) <rimbosity AT sbcglobal DOT net> on Wednesday June 09, 2004 @07:31PM (#9383153) Homepage Journal
        "When laws stop making any kind of sense or justice, I stop obeying them."

        Or as Thoreau stated in "Civil Disobedience," when a law is unjust, it is the duty of the just man to break that law.

        • Re:Thanks, Henry David Thoreau! (Score:5, Interesting)

          by Hatta ( 162192 ) on Thursday June 10, 2004 @12:00AM (#9384315) Journal
          The proper quote is:
          "Under a government who imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is prison."
          I strongly encourage everyone to read this essay. It is, IMNSHO, the most important statement on the relationship between man and the state ever written. Here are more gems:
          This government never of itself furthured any enterprise but with the alacrity with which it got out of its way. It does not keep the country free. It does not settle the west. It does not educate. The character inherent in the American people has done all that has been accomplished; and would have done if the government had not sometimes gotten in its way. For government is an expediant, by which men would fain succeed in letting one another alone; and as has been said, when it is most expediant, the governed are most left alone by it"

          Must the citizen ever for a moment, or in the least degree, resign his conscience to the legislator? Why has every man a conscience then?

          The mass of men serve the state thus, not as men mainly, but as machines, with their bodies. They are the standing army, and the militia, jailers, constables, posse comitatus, etc. In most cases there is no free exercise whatever of the judgement or of the moral sense; but they put themselves on a level with wood and earth and stones; and wooden men can perhaps be manufactured that will serve the purpose as well. Such command no more respect than men of straw or a lump of dirt. They have the same sort of worth only as horses and dogs.

          This one is particularly relevant today:
          I hear of a convention to be held at Baltimore, or elsewhere, for the selection of a candidate for the Presidency, made up chiefly of editors, and men who are politicans by profession; but I think, what is it to any independant, intelligent, and respectable man what decision they may come to? Shall we not have the advantage of this wisdom and honesty nevertheless?

          I've gotten carried away here, there's just too much, so I'll end with a bit from the last paragraph:
          The progress from an absolute to a limited monarcy, from a limited monarcy to a democracy, is a progress toward a true respect for the individual... Is a democracy, such as we know it, the last improvement possible in government? Is it not possible to take a step further towards recognizing and organizing the rights of man? There will never be a really free and enlightened State, until the State comes to recognize the individual as a higher and independant power, from which its own power and authority are derived, and treats him accordingly.

  • That else are the gonna do? (Score:4, Funny)

    by Skyshadow ( 508 ) * on Wednesday June 09, 2004 @03:31PM (#9381313) Homepage
    Hey, if the government doesn't trash the economy and the rights of individuals in order to protect an outdated and relatively small sector of the business community, what good are they?
    • Wasn't the country's ideal built around the phrase "Government by the people, and for the people."?
      • Note that this is the UN, not the government. At least not my government.

  • Stop stealing the photons I'm emitting (Score:5, Funny)

    by IvyMike ( 178408 ) on Wednesday June 09, 2004 @03:33PM (#9381336)
    I'm serious. I keep emitting photons, and all these people keep engaging in signal theft, usually by looking at me, or even more nefariously by having cameras.

  • The world gets together to talk (Score:5, Insightful)

    by darth_MALL ( 657218 ) on Wednesday June 09, 2004 @03:33PM (#9381338)
    and look what they choose to do with it. *sigh*
  • The US is only the best at ignoring them if they're inconvenient. This would cause so many problems for US business that the government will ignore this even if WIPO were to descend from a cloud in a fiery chariot and writing the treaty into the side of a mountain with a flaming finger.

    • Re:Relax, it's only a treaty. (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Alsee ( 515537 ) on Wednesday June 09, 2004 @04:10PM (#9381709) Homepage
      You have it BACKWARDS. The US and corporations are pushing *for* this treaty. The purpose is to shut down the pesky public and pesky innovators with things like VCRs and the internet and PVRs and opensorce software that can allow a computer to be or do anything with 'content'.

      Corporations especially want to eliminate that pesky 'fair use' nonsense.

      -

  • lets see... (Score:4, Informative)

    by abscondment ( 672321 ) on Wednesday June 09, 2004 @03:35PM (#9381360) Homepage

    participate in the manufacture, importation, sale, or any other act that makes available a device or system capable of decrypting or helping to decrypt an encrypted program-carrying signal

    This doesn't only rule out computers; say goodbye to paper and pencil, too.

    Depending on what sorts of "encryption" were used with a signal, all sorts of devices could potentially aid in that signal's decryption. I mean, it could be argued that whatever appliance was intended to receive that signal could potentially be modified to aid in decryption. Sounds a little self defeating--lets hope it actually is defeated.

    • It makes devices intended to decrypt that signal illegal. Doesn't that include the devices designed to do exactly that? If you transmit an encrypted signal, then you have to get the people who are supposed to actually legally get that signal a device that can decrypt it.

      This is so vague that it's ridiculous.

    • Re:lets see... (Score:3, Interesting)

      by RickHunter ( 103108 )

      That makes the frigging human brain illegal in countries that ratify this treaty. I can decrypt "program-carrying signals" encoded with Caesar ciphers in my head.

  • from Article 16, Alternative V:

    2. In particular, effective legal remedies shall be provided against those who:
    ...
    (iii) participate in the manufacture, importation, sale, or any other act that makes available a device or system capable of decrypting or helping to decrypt an encrypted program-carrying signal.

    This is obviously insanely vague. Now, they might argue that obviously they didn't mean to outlaw PCs and televisions with this wording, and of course it wouldn't be interpreted that way. But that's not the point.

    The point is, such vague and overly inculsive laws set a dangerous precedent. Later on, when somebody wants to outlaw some new form of decryption technology, all they have to do is point to the language of this law and say, "see, this is exactly the sort of thing it's talking about." Never mind that this language is so broad it could be applied to almost anything with circuitry.

    The freedom you give up now, assuming the goodwill of the powers that be, is the freedom you won't have later when that goodwill runs out.

    • Re:The trouble with vague legislation (Score:5, Insightful)

      by pclminion ( 145572 ) on Wednesday June 09, 2004 @03:51PM (#9381543)
      Never mind that this language is so broad it could be applied to almost anything with circuitry.

      Just circuitry? This treaty refers to a "device or system." That's by no means limited to circuitry.

      The atmosphere is a system, a physical one, which provides sustenance to humans and allows them to remain alive so they can decrypt signals. Hence, this treaty outlaws the atmosphere.

      A human is a system, a biological one, which is capable of decrypting signals. Hence, this treaty outlaws humans.

      The universe is a system, the ultimate system, in which the pesky humans and their decrypting computers exist. Were it not for the universe, nobody would be able to break their precious signals. Hence, this treaty outlaws the universe.

      Jeez, if you're going to hold people to the letter of the law, you better make damn sure your law doesn't accidentally outlaw the universe.

      • you better make damn sure your law doesn't accidentally outlaw the universe.

        I guess it's a good thing you can't have everything, otherwise you might be prosecuted for posession of the universe. "Damn it, officer, you planted the universe on me and you know it!"

    • The freedom you give up now

      We're not giving up anything now. We gave up our freedoms when we decided that it was not treason of the highest order, and certainly worthy of kicking someone out of office next election, to make law in the US via treaty. The abysmal treaties that have constrained patents, trade, and any number of other activities and rights are not subject to any judicial review, and they are written, primarily, by members of the executive branch, thus curtailing the powers of the legislature.

      • Re:The trouble with vague legislation (Score:4, Insightful)

        by hchaos ( 683337 ) on Wednesday June 09, 2004 @06:14PM (#9382651)
        We're not giving up anything now. We gave up our freedoms when we decided that it was not treason of the highest order, and certainly worthy of kicking someone out of office next election, to make law in the US via treaty.
        Yes, we did give up our freedoms when we ratified the US Consitution. That document has given us nothing but trouble.
    • (iii) participate in the manufacture, [..] that makes available a device or system capable of decrypting or helping to decrypt an encrypted program-carrying signal.

      Umm... Did they just propose outlawing sex? I mean, a human is about the best 'system capable of helping to decrypt an encrypted signal' I can think of.

  • Pathetic (Score:3, Insightful)

    by b0lt ( 729408 ) on Wednesday June 09, 2004 @03:36PM (#9381372)
    This shows what happens when bureaucracy gets a hold of power. What's next? Banning oxygen, since its a flame hazard?

  • Pen and paper is illegal! (Score:4, Insightful)

    by www.sorehands.com ( 142825 ) on Wednesday June 09, 2004 @03:36PM (#9381373) Homepage
    "participate in the manufacture, importation, sale, or any other act that makes available a device or system capable of decrypting or helping to decrypt an encrypted program-carrying signal."

    This could outlaw calculators -- especially ones that can do hex -- pen, paper, crayons, blackboards, telephone.

    It can outlaw trucks, cars, and telephones since they can be used to make available ideas, calculations, and formulas, that can help decrypt signals.

  • The Human Brain Is Illegal? (Score:4, Funny)

    by the_mad_poster ( 640772 ) <shattoc@adelphia.com> on Wednesday June 09, 2004 @03:36PM (#9381376) Homepage Journal

    participate in the manufacture, importation, sale, or any other act that makes available a device or system capable of decrypting or helping to decrypt an encrypted program-carrying signal.

    Apparently procreation and thinking are not something WIPO is keen on, as the human brain is a "a system" of tissues "capable of decrypting or helping to decrypt an encrypted program-carrying signal".

  • Hmmm.... (Score:2, Insightful)

    by DecayCell ( 778710 )
    Is getting my brain fried because of too much TV electromagnetic radiation considered signal theft?

  • Uh, if you don't want your signal stolen.. (Score:4, Funny)

    by the_rajah ( 749499 ) * on Wednesday June 09, 2004 @03:39PM (#9381405) Homepage
    for Pete's sake just don't broadcast it!! How simple is that. Duh!!

    "Do the Right Thing. It will gratify some people and astound the rest." - Mark Twain

  • Need Open Hardware (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Ugmo ( 36922 ) on Wednesday June 09, 2004 @03:43PM (#9381451)
    Plans to build PC like computers from parts of other Consumer electronic devices are needed.

    If the generic PC is outlawed and Microsoft is able to push through DRM encumbered hardware as a new standard, it might be a good idea to be able to open up an old Tivo-like DRM laden device, a console like the X-box or a HDTV and use the parts to make a PC.

    I know that the Tivo and Xbox are really just computers today and they can be hacked, but in the future laws or manufacturers may make this more difficult. It would be great if we could build our own PC's from parts and circumvent stupid laws.

  • You may only encrypt your datas!!!!1 (Score:3, Interesting)

    by sockonafish ( 228678 ) on Wednesday June 09, 2004 @03:43PM (#9381454)

    from Article 16, Alternative V:

    2. In particular, effective legal remedies shall be provided against those who: ...
    (iii) participate in the manufacture, importation, sale, or any other act that makes available a device or system capable of decrypting or helping to decrypt an encrypted program-carrying signal.

    So while we may encrypt things, we will never under any circumstance be able to decrypt them. This would outlaw DVD players, too.

    The UN charter (and US Constitution) need amendments outlawing illogical legislation.

  • What moron drafted this? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by pclminion ( 145572 ) on Wednesday June 09, 2004 @03:46PM (#9381477)
    participate in the manufacture, importation, sale, or any other act that makes available a device or system capable of decrypting or helping to decrypt an encrypted program-carrying signal

    That doesn't just outlaw PCs, it outlaws everything. It outlaws the Earth, because on the Earth is a living system of organisms, one of which (homo sapiens) is capable of decrypting a program-carrying signal. Without the support system of the Earth, humans could not exist, therefore the Earth is "helping to decrypt."

    I have to wonder how people, who are obviously incapable of drafting a treaty without accidentally outlawing all of existence, have ever reached such positions of legal authority...

    • Re:What moron drafted this? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Lodragandraoidh ( 639696 ) on Wednesday June 09, 2004 @04:21PM (#9381801) Journal
      WIPO is almost fully (91% I believe) funded by IP holding multinational corporations. Their charter states that their purpose is to bring IP protection standardization to the world - which translates to mean standardizing IP protections to best benefit thier primary funders.

      Developing nations and public advocacy groups are being crushed as the IP juggernaut rolls on.

  • So... (Score:3, Informative)

    by Smallest ( 26153 ) on Wednesday June 09, 2004 @03:46PM (#9381490)
    did you lift this write-up from BoingBoing [boingboing.net], or vice-versa ?

  • workers unite (Score:4, Funny)

    by nut ( 19435 ) on Wednesday June 09, 2004 @03:50PM (#9381532)
    Rich capitalist pigs are trying to steal the internet off the people who make it actually work for them.

    I say turn the internet off for a couple of days, see how they like that ;)
  • a device or system capable of decrypting or helping to decrypt an encrypted program-carrying signal

    When encryption is outlawed, only outlaws will have encryption.

    You can have my encrytpion when you pry it from my cold dead hands...er...PDA.

  • that a new type of governance is being successfully pushed - 'capitacracy'. This is where only the largest businesses and wealthiest people have any say and all forms of communication/expression and liberty not controlled by said entities will be outlawed? Regardless of its intent, every lawyer knows this vagueness can be exploited to further all kinds of oppressive litigation and control. It's time to start skimming the gene pool

  • Turn OFF that tube !! (Score:4, Insightful)

    by mritunjai ( 518932 ) on Wednesday June 09, 2004 @04:00PM (#9381631) Homepage
    Once it was said that couch potatoes hurt themselves watching TV all day.

    No NOT! They hurt many more. Millions of couch potatoes made dancers and singers and their supporting corporations SO strong that they're now trying to control information and educational channels because it *may* be used to *steal* *BROADCAST* signals !!!

    What next ? Are they going to ban copper wires cuz they can be used to hook onto power grid and *possibly* steal electric power ???

    Throw that idiot box out of your house if you're really serious about protesting against this insanity!!

  • WIPO (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Seth Cohn ( 24111 ) on Wednesday June 09, 2004 @04:02PM (#9381650)
    Sadly, government corrupts, and world government corrupts absolutely.

    For those of us in the United States, I strongly urge you to look at things like the Free State Project. (http://www.freestateproject.org [freestateproject.org])This isn't a bunch of wackos looking to move to Montana for another Waco holdout, it's made of people like you who will stand up, be active, and work within New Hampshire (already the best representative State with only 3000 people per Rep, as well as strongly libertarian minded) to reduce the size of government. It's our only hope, because the more they pass nonsense like this, the more you and your neighbors had better stand together...

    If p2p becomes a crime, you want your neighbors to defend you when the thoughtcrime police show up. And don't kid yourselves, we are rapidly coming to that.... The day when you click on the wrong download button and the police knock on your door is already here.
    Don't own a computer? Get sued by the RIAA [techzonez.com]
    12 years old? Get sued by the RIAA [afterdawn.com]
    66 Years old and never used a computer? Yes, Get sued by the RIAA [boycott-riaa.com]
    Now just imagine the force of the WIPO, and 'the law' bolstering this nonsense...

  • Withdraw from the UN (Score:3, Informative)

    by man_ls ( 248470 ) on Wednesday June 09, 2004 @04:04PM (#9381666)
    The United States is powerful enough to be able to cut its own deals with the rest of the world.

    Like it or not, that's the truth.

    Thus, we don't need the UN. We don't need the UN dictating what we can and cannot do to us.

    Additionally, wouldn't a treaty such as this one violate some parts of the Constitution?

    My very limited IANAL legal knowledge, the Constitution is the highest, followed by Treaty, then Statute. Thus, if a treaty like this would break the constitutionally protected freedoms of speech and expression and all that, it's invalid.

    Not that anyone would actually dare challenge the WIPO but that's just another point to think about.

    • Re:Withdraw from the UN (Score:3, Insightful)

      by argent ( 18001 )
      Given the stupid software patent trend started in the US, they're more likely to end up embracing and extending this precedent than withdrawing from it.
  • We ARE all being ruled by corperations!

    Well at least by proxy. Coperate reps bribe/dine/blackmail/makeloveto ministers/senators/congressmen/presidents/MEPs/Med iaBosses
    and the rest of us end up losing what little rights we have.

    WIPO is a forum set up by the powerful for the powerful. An unelected body whose job it is to increase the powers of producers and reduce the rights of consumers.

    I'm sick of this rubbish. Big business getting laws passed so that if we want to even glance at a film we must pay money each and every time. what's next? CD's with ongoing fees? DVD's that self destruct? MP3s with encryption?

    Oh wait......

  • Not Your Friend! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Nom du Keyboard ( 633989 ) on Wednesday June 09, 2004 @04:14PM (#9381737)
    Why do people -- at least those in relatively free countries -- keep thinking the United Nations is your friend? It's not!

    And it hasn't been every since it quit trying to regulate how countries behaved, and started trying to regulate how the people within those countries behave!

    There are a lot of rather repressed countries seeking to use this UN to regulate the entire world down to the lowest common denominator. So this should be no surprise to anyone.

  • This proposal would outlaw the creation of any "system capable of decrypting or helping to decrypt an encrypted program-carrying signal".

    However, whether these people realize it or not, it is humanly possible to decrypt or to help decrypt a program carrying signal by hand, starting with nothing more than the raw unencrypted data! Technically, that would make the act of human reproduction illegal, since the child could very conceivably grow up into a person with enough mental accuity to take on a task like that. Yes, it would take time, but there's no mention of how long is has to take in order for the system to be outlawed. This proposal is tantamount to governing what people are legally even allowed to _think_ about and absolutely, categorically, _MUST_ be stopped.

  • On the plus side, with no more home computers, nobody will be using Windows anymore either.

  • Signal theft???? (Score:3, Funny)

    by LWATCDR ( 28044 ) on Wednesday June 09, 2004 @04:22PM (#9381815) Homepage Journal
    If you do not want me listen to your signal then keep your photons off my property! What next? Will I get arrested because the people next door play there stereo too loud and I can hear music I did not pay for.
    BTW this law would also make paper and pens illegal. As well as the human brain so I guess sex is also illegal.

    "participate in the manufacture, importation, sale, or any other act that makes available a device or system capable of decrypting or helping to decrypt an encrypted program-carrying signal."

  • Canada's comments disregarded (Score:5, Informative)

    by kwandar ( 733439 ) on Wednesday June 09, 2004 @04:24PM (#9381842)

    Apparently most/all of Canada's comments were completely disregarded.

    I'm left to wonder if our representation is that bad (probably) or if Canada is just expected to go along with the status quo, as put forth by the US (probably).

    Personally - while radical and unlikely - I'd just as soon see Canada completely withdraw from this organisation.

  • Brush up on those mad hardware hacking skills... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Lodragandraoidh ( 639696 ) on Wednesday June 09, 2004 @04:29PM (#9381882) Journal
    If computers are outlawed, or probably more reasonable - computers without DRM (or any other device you can think of), what can we do to counter it?

    How much would it cost to build a small microchip cleanroom in my garage (for my own use, of course)?
    • That is the big question. Is computing technology going to have special restrictions that is legally required?

      Do I need a lawyer while writing my software, and have that lawyer review my code to make sure that it doesn't violate patents, copyright, legal restrictions, etc.?

      I dread the day that lawyers outnumber software developers in the typical software company. Some companies (SCO, for instance, but also Dolby Laboratories and a few more successful companies) are already in this situation.

      I hope that

  • How did Argentina get in the middle of this???? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by TheNarrator ( 200498 ) on Wednesday June 09, 2004 @04:47PM (#9382033)
    From the link " Making the PC Illegal [freedom-to-tinker.com]".
    Note this this is just an "alternative" under consideration. It was proposed by Argentina, and Switzerland proposed language that "roughly corresponds" to it. I don't know whether the U.S. has taken a position on this, but I assume the U.S. is still in favor of computers being legal.

    Argentina doesn't really have a significant media industry with the exception of exporting some telenovelas. How did they get into the middle of setting intellectual property and technology standards? Maybe it's the less than democratic governments in the developing world that are equal members of WIPO that put all this weird stuff in here. I'm talking about the same countries who put Cuba, Zimbabwe and Sudan on the U.N human rights commission.

  • You should also be aware (Score:4, Interesting)

    by GMFTatsujin ( 239569 ) on Wednesday June 09, 2004 @05:15PM (#9382237) Homepage
    By surfing Slashdot, you may be violating your listener's license agreement.

    Give your ears a taste of Independant Librarian Dynamic Sean Kennedy the Sixth [theafternow.com] for a truly horrific scenario based on this kind of shinanegans. Then give him a little donation because, at the moment, his stories are still legal to freely record, broadcast, and disseminate.

  • Who are we kidding (Score:5, Insightful)

    by pherris ( 314792 ) on Wednesday June 09, 2004 @10:04PM (#9383847) Homepage Journal
    We complained about:

    Digital Millennium Copyright Act

    USA PATRIOT Act and the proposed PATRIOT II Act

    CAPPS and CAPPS II

    Copyright Extentions

    Software Patents

    Evoting without a paper trail

    ECHELON

    Privacy concerns with RFIDs

    SLAPPs (Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation)

    EULAs

    Racial Profiling in Law Enforcement

    What was done? Nothing. Does anyone here really believe that Congress will "do the right thing" on this "broadcast bit" issue? The magic eight ball says "no fucking way". I personally don't see what the solution is. Bread, circus and prison baby, that's all that will be left.

    If I may quote Frank Zappa from "The Meek Shall Inherit Nothing":

    You say yer life's a bum deal

    'N yer up against the wall ...
    Well, people, you ain't even got no kinda
    Deal at all
    'Cause what they do
    In Washington
    They just takes care of NUMBER ONE
    An' NUMBER ONE ain't YOU
    You ain't even NUMBER TWO
    Think about this: in Iraq right now there are US Soldiers without bulletproof jackets and Humvees without any armour protection yet with have >$100M USD for a State Funeral of Former President Reagan?

    Forget it kids, game over.

Slashdot Top Deals

The truth of a proposition has nothing to do with its credibility. And vice versa.

Close