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

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Censorship Government The Internet United States Politics

Induce Act Stalled For Now 162

Posted by CowboyNeal from the things-looking-up dept.
Neil Wehneman writes "The AP is reporting, through Newsday, the great news that the Induce Act is not going anywhere this legislative term. Thanks to everyone who took action in various ways, although there's a strong chance we'll see this type of bill again soon. Additional thanks go to Copyfight for the initial heads-up."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Induce Act Stalled For Now More

Induce Act Stalled For Now

Comments Filter:

  • Today we fight together..tomorrow? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by cOdEgUru ( 181536 ) * on Thursday October 07, 2004 @10:45PM (#10466806) Homepage Journal
    Its commendable that Corporate America and its consumers worked hand in hand to push this bill back where it crawled out of. It was a fair fight and a dumb bill and it needed to be put to rest and now it has, albeit temporarily. I worry how the fight will go down when we are pitched against each other and the fight's fair on our end, but the cash pile is taller on their end? Also in today's world when corporate will can be swayed by a few choice words like "terrorism", "patriotism" lobbed at them by the Govt, do we think they will stand with us when we fight the beaureacracy? Everyone chooses their fight a lot more carefully these days, owing to their allegiances and their master's wishes..

    • Re:Today we fight together..tomorrow? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by erick99 ( 743982 ) <homerun@gmail.com> on Thursday October 07, 2004 @10:47PM (#10466816)
      We will see next legislative session. I am surprised it died this time. I think that tells us that there are reasonable folks on the side of not passing this and it may not come down to who has the tallest pile of money. At least, I hope it doesn't come down to that. For now, I am encouraged.

      • Re:Today we fight together..tomorrow? (Score:5, Insightful)

        by DAldredge ( 2353 ) <SlashdotEmail@GMail.Com> on Thursday October 07, 2004 @11:06PM (#10466970) Journal
        No, it tells you an election is coming up and they don't want to be asked about this in the last 30 days before people vote.

        That is all that has happened, nothing else.

        • Re:Today we fight together..tomorrow? (Score:5, Informative)

          by grumpygrodyguy ( 603716 ) on Thursday October 07, 2004 @11:35PM (#10467136)
          No, it tells you an election is coming up and they don't want to be asked about this in the last 30 days before people vote.

          That is all that has happened, nothing else.

          That is probably the most relevant post you'll see in this thread. Don't read the article with a sigh of relief and attribute it to the long overdue arrival of common sense on capital hill.

          Be prepared to do whatever you can to defend your online rights in 30 days. If you still think this is just a bunch of hype, or don't understand what is at stake, please take a moment to read this article. [savebetamax.org]

          The Betamax ruling is the only thing that protects your right to own a VCR, tape recorder, CD-burner, DVD-burner, iPod, or TiVo. It's that important. But new legislation that's being pushed through the Senate by lobbyists for the music and movie industries would override the Betamax decision and create a huge liability for any business that makes products which can copy sound or video. This legislation (formerly known as the INDUCE Act) would essentially give Hollywood veto power over a huge range of new technologies.

          Another great quote which describes the situation well:

          Is Congress Insane?

          You might think so at first glance. Voters, technology experts, public interest groups, and electronics manufacturers all oppose these efforts to weaken Betamax. So why is it still happening? Because the major record labels and the movie studios-- the same companies that opposed the Betamax ruling-- make huge donations to the re-election campaigns of the Senators who are sponsoring this legislation. And most members of Congress assume this is a non-controversial issue, off the radar of most voters. If they can please their donors without a big fuss, they will. It's bad policy, but until we start making noise, it's smart politics.

          • Re:Today we fight together..tomorrow? (Score:5, Interesting)

            by servognome ( 738846 ) on Friday October 08, 2004 @12:43AM (#10467412)
            Because the major record labels and the movie studios-- the same companies that opposed the Betamax ruling-- make huge donations to the re-election campaigns of the Senators who are sponsoring this legislation
            It will probably become a pissing contest between electronics companies and record labels. Electronics makers/distributors/retailers have alot more money, and more importantly employ alot more voters than the labels. What most likely will happen is some watered down bill that goes against P2P and/or other "outside the corporate structure" copying methods. So betamax will be protected as long as you are running a megacorp.
          • This type of crap usually skips over the pond to here about 5 - 10 years after its attacked the US. Just out of curiosity, since the INDUCE act would probably force a great deal of companies to change thier manufacturing process', ie move out of the US, not to import, make americans redundant; would this violate the PATRIOT act? Could the bozo,s who legislate and lobbied for it be prosecuted?
            • You say that and then you will probably vote for an anti Europe party at the next election and wonder why it is only Britain that gets it. Blair has spent his whole time bent over and lifting his shirt tails for Bush so I doubt that it would take as long as you say but it is unlikely to get into Europe although it is bound to get talked about and they will make nice noises. Holland would never allow it no matter what and neither would several others so it would be unlikely to get debated.
          • Interesting, according to http://www.opensecrets.org/ [opensecrets.org], Hatch collected a whopping $34068 from the TV/Movie/Music industry, which works out to 9.3% of the total PAC contributions to him in '04. Maybe there's a connection, but that level of funding would likely only get you a lunch with most congresscritters.

        • No, it tells you an election is coming up and they don't want to be asked about this in the last 30 days before people vote.

          That is all that has happened, nothing else.

          You're close, but this is actually much more sinister. It's a very common tactic that goes like this:

          1. Propose a piece of legislation which is laughably and completely unreasonalby draconian and make a half-hearted attempt at passing it.
          2. Sit and watch while people all over the place spend their time and money opposing it until it is defeated.
          3. Propose the draconian legislation you really want. By this point, the opposition has already exhausted their funds and energies, and your legislation passes with little opposition.

          Steps 1 and 2 have now been accomplished. I'm just waiting for step 3 when more of my few remaining rights have been taken away. It will, as you say, though happen after the election.

          *sigh*

          • you forgot step 4 -
            introduce and pass an amendment that takes the milder version back up to the level of the original bill.

            (and I guess the obligatory step 5 - Profit!! (for once it's actually appropriate))

          • You forgot something else: LAME DUCK SESSIONS OF CONGRESS!

            For those outside the USA this is a session of congress after an election before the new congress sets. This is when the guys who lost punish the voters for removing them from office! It is also so far from an election that most people forget to pay those who betray them during such sessions in the voting booth.

            HEADS UP INCOMMING!

            • You forgot something else: LAME DUCK SESSIONS OF CONGRESS!

              For those outside the USA this is a session of congress after an election before the new congress sets. This is when the guys who lost punish the voters for removing them from office! It is also so far from an election that most people forget to pay those who betray them during such sessions in the voting booth.

              Derivations of the British parliamentary system seem to be much better in this respect. In Canada, for example, the government is disso

          • Huh? (Score:2)

            by schon ( 31600 )
            I'm just waiting for step 3 when more of my few remaining rights have been taken away.

            If you're right about steps 1 and 2 [wired.com], then this *was* step 3.

    • Re:Today we fight together..tomorrow? (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Chrax ( 782154 ) on Thursday October 07, 2004 @11:00PM (#10466923)
      I could be wrong, but I was under the impression that typically government and corporate America work hand in hand. Corporate America isn't swayed by words like terrorism. As if they give a fuck about terrorism. Rebuilding's good for them in general. Did you notice that the first thing Bush said after 9/11 was "don't stop spending"? Government helps out corporations so that they can keep lining their pockets.

    • Re:Today we fight together..tomorrow? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by MBCook ( 132727 ) <foobarsoft@foobarsoft.com> on Thursday October 07, 2004 @11:12PM (#10467006) Homepage
      Yes, it's worrysome, but there is some stuff on our side.

      First is... we controll their cashflow. They can push and push, but one day they'll push so far that the average Joe starts to see it and rebel (already started some with people unable to copy their "CDs" to their iPods). And when they are spending tons on lawyers and it is only driving down their cash flow by pissing off consumers, that's a recipy for their death. Too bad that probably won't happen any time soon.

      Second is that with at least the buzzwords of the day don't really apply. I mean, how high do you have to be to think that copying your legal CD to your iPod or watching a movie on your TV (God forbid!) is "terrorism" or that it's "patriotism" to not be allowed to tape a TV show?

      • First is... we controll their cashflow. They can push and push, but one day they'll push so far that the average Joe starts to see it and rebel

        Damn, if I had some mod points, I'd mod you up...

        There are many politicions who want to make you think that you are helpless against the mega-corps so you'll vote for them so they can "save" you from the bad guys.

      • Re:Today we fight together..tomorrow? (Score:5, Insightful)

        by halowolf ( 692775 ) on Friday October 08, 2004 @12:54AM (#10467442)
        If a sizable population of people start to affect the cashflow, that its possible that it will be represented by the MPAA and RIAA as the effects of piracy rather than disgruntled consumers. I mean they are shouting about piracy right now, and thats when their members are making more money than ever before.

        Of course that kind of spin could only be sustained for so long until the cashflow problem became so acute that there would have to be an admission about what the cause of the problem was so that it can be fixed.

        We may control the cashflow but they still have the books. Perhaps a independant third party review of their claims about piracy and the effects on sales volumes and profits should be conducted, just to make sure that the truth is not being misrepresented.

      • > we controll their cashflow

        So? They control the market, promotion, the radio, the concert venues. Unless youre in a metro area which can cater to indie labels, they pretty much own YOU. You get the same nine bands and twenty one singles per quarter. You get the same morning zoo on the radio. You get the same ticketmaster fees. etc. This fight has been going on since the early 70s and we've lost.

        Divest in the mainstream music, find some indie labels and bands you like. Indie may not be perfect but
        • Comment removed based on user account deletion
          • Those are good numbers, and I completely agree. However, my excuse is "we're getting old". Going to a concert? Not any more.

            Anyway, this is why they love teenagers and college kids. They're the ones spending money on their most profitable market (slick-pop).

            The music industry had some boom years when people were buying CD's for the quality, and to replace their vinyl/tape. It's no wonder the numbers went down. Add a recession that affected EVERY OTHER MARKET, and that's another reason the numbers went do

    • We never fought together, we never should (Score:5, Insightful)

      by zaxios ( 776027 ) <zaxios@gmail.com> on Friday October 08, 2004 @12:21AM (#10467334) Journal
      Its commendable that Corporate America and its consumers worked hand in hand to push this bill back where it crawled out of.

      While some technology companies did oppose the Act, it is totally unreasonable to say that "Corporate America" opposed it. The INDUCE Act was lobbied for by the RIAA and MPAA and supported by Microsoft, among others. It is the ability of Corporate America to push bills into Congress with thick wads of bills in envelopes that resulted in the DMCA and the introduction of this Act.

      I worry how the fight will go down when we are pitched against each other and the fight's fair on our end, but the cash pile is taller on their end?

      i.e., now.

      Also in today's world when corporate will can be swayed by a few choice words like "terrorism", "patriotism" lobbed at them by the Govt,

      Businesses act in self-interest, so abstract, not-directly-profitable ideas like patriotism mean nothing. Meanwhile, terrorism means contracts from the U.S. goverment. These things are designed to scare the citizenry into line, not companies.

      do we think they will stand with us when we fight the beaureacracy?

      Okay, you are off the planet. Corporate America arm in arm with the Government has borne bureaucracy at its foulest. Corporate America does not fight democracy-choking bureaucracy. They fight for it. The more complex and indirect the Government's sovereignty it is, the less obvious and inescapable its accountability to its citizens. Bureaucracy affords corporate America far more ways to, for example, shove through acts like the DMCA or shoot down acts that would interfere with the pharmaceutical industry's profit margin, and importantly, keep the interests of the consumer and the people away from their government.

      (This time, BSA (with its tech company members) opposed the INDUCE Act because it would hurt technology. Pure business pragmatism. Meanwhile, companies with an interest in maintaining control of digital content companies, lobbied for the Act. Again, pure business pragmatism.)

      We never fought together; we never should. Our causes sometimes overlap. More often than not they don't. But this never changes: members of any "free market" should have no power in changing the rules of the market itself.

      The Government should represent the people only, each person weighed equally, not proportionate to their access to capital. The government's power and authority is granted by every single person, from nowhere else, and it would do well to remember that if eventually we all grow sick enough of its corruption.

  • And to celebrate.... (Score:4, Funny)

    by dudemm ( 810718 ) on Thursday October 07, 2004 @10:47PM (#10466821)
    http://www.suprnova.org/ [suprnova.org]

  • Makes me think (Score:2, Informative)

    by stroustrup ( 712004 )
    Why are there no acts under consideration that will "induce" the music industry to lower prices to reasonable levels?

    • Re:Makes me think (Score:3, Insightful)

      by hunterx11 ( 778171 )
      For the same reason (hopefully) that this didn't fly--because America is at least supposed to be a free country.

      • Re:Makes me think (Score:4, Insightful)

        by JJahn ( 657100 ) on Thursday October 07, 2004 @11:39PM (#10467175)
        By free in the context I'll assume you are talking about the economy. The U.S. is not a fully capitalist economy (free, using a general term). There are tons of laws on the books, such as the Sherman Antitrust Act, laws against price fixing, and so on. These laws restrict the free marketplace, and therefore there is no basis for considering the United States a "free" country, especially in the case of the economy. I'm not going to touch the issue of civil rights and freedom.

  • Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Thursday October 07, 2004 @10:48PM (#10466825)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion

    • Re:Regardless (Score:4, Interesting)

      by dtfinch ( 661405 ) * on Friday October 08, 2004 @02:12AM (#10467747) Journal
      I've been reading Lawrence Lessig's Free Culture, and found it very insightful.

      Point out all the times that corporations supporting old technologies have lobbied congress against new technologies citing piracy, property rights, and labeling their competitors as criminals. Congress has never given in to illegalizing newer, superior technologies in favor of old technologies controlled by a handful of massive corporations, until recently.

      The constitution gave Congress the power to grant copyrights for only a limited term and for the sole purpose of promoting the progress of science and the useful arts. This is still what it says today, and I (and many others) believe that Congress has violated the constitution in over-extending the reach of copyrights and increasing their lifetime indefinitely. The current trend is that copyrights will never expire, and the information is simply lost to the world because they're out of print and copies are discarded when they get too old. This nonesense going in Congress is not only destroying our future but our past as well.

      You know what radio stations have to pay recording artists and major labels? Nothing. They pay directly to the composers and song writers a small, fixed amount defined by Congress (back when it understood the purpose of copyright) because letting the recording industry set the price threatened the new distribution technology in favor of old physical media. Now the recording industry is after P2P, seeking to destroy the superior competing technology rather than finding a balance.

      The battle fought by the RIAA isn't about copyrights or piracy, it's about control of the media, and how media is created and distributed.

  • Bias? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by SkyWalk423 ( 661752 ) on Thursday October 07, 2004 @10:49PM (#10466836) Homepage Journal
    From the article:

    • ...aimed at manufacturers of file-sharing software commonly used to steal electronic copies of music, movies and computer programs...

    Wasn't there a more, how shall I put this... unbiased way to word the intro to this article??

    • Re:Bias? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Chrax ( 782154 ) on Thursday October 07, 2004 @10:56PM (#10466893)
      Why would they need to? What's being done is stealing. The point is that it's not the hardware or software that's doing it, it's the person using them. That's why everybody's against this act, because it would prevent us from using our stuff legally. If you choose to use it illegally, you are stealing, and we don't need an unbiased word, we need an accurate word.

      • Comment removed (Score:5, Informative)

        by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Thursday October 07, 2004 @10:59PM (#10466921)
        Comment removed based on user account deletion
      • Firstly, that's debatable. Unauthorized use is different from theft.

        But more importantly, just because a word is true doesn't mean it's unbiased. If an article on abortion called the doctors "Womb suckers," it would be biased. Not because it's untrue, but because it's emotionally charged.

      • What's being done is stealing.

        So, when I burn a CD of mine and put it on my iPod, that's theft? What a strange world you must live in.

      • The idea that copyright infringement is theft is very recent and not well-considered. Here is an excellent article outlining the issue, by a Stanford law professor:


        http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract _ id =582602

        The gist of the argument is that property law was developed to deal with the problem of "negative externalities", which are things that cost me when someone else uses a good or resource. The traditional example is that your grazing your sheep on my land reduces my ability to graze my

  • Goliath vs. Andre (Score:4, Interesting)

    by daemonenwind ( 178848 ) on Thursday October 07, 2004 @10:52PM (#10466860)
    I was never really worried about this bill.

    Quite frankly, it's new media vs. old media, and each side has their pet legislators and lobbyists.

    And, in the game of law-passing, it's easier to stall something to death than it is to pass it through. Do Nothings always beat Do Somethings.

    Especially in government.

  • Complete Coverage of INDUCE From the Beginning (Score:5, Informative)

    by The Importance of ( 529734 ) * on Thursday October 07, 2004 @10:55PM (#10466886) Homepage
    Well over 100 posts, including a copy of the final draft that torpedoed the negotiations: INDUCE Act Archives [corante.com]

  • Good. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Breakfast Pants ( 323698 ) on Thursday October 07, 2004 @10:59PM (#10466914) Journal
    Good. The induce act was unnecessary as the napster case already showed.
    • Good. The induce act was unnecessary as the napster case already showed.


      The MPAA is not happy with the way the courts have decided the more recent cases related to Morpheus and the other P-2-P companies which don't have a central database of the shared material. They want a stronger law so that they can shutdown all P-2-P software/companies.

  • Senator Geek (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Doc Ruby ( 173196 ) on Thursday October 07, 2004 @11:03PM (#10466941) Homepage Journal
    We need a senator going off the geek vote to introduce a short bill that merely confirms that tbe Betamax Law applies to current technology. Who's our Senator? Who could be? Let's get to work now.
    • What are you suggesting, moving to New Hampshire with the Libertarians? Otherwise, we probably aren't numerous enough to elect a senator solely on geek issues.

      It's a great idea, but the only way I can see that it would come even close to working is if we engineered a coalition between Geeks, Greens, and Libertarians (i.e., everyone opposed to corporatism).
      • Four words.

        Total political website redirection.

        Goatse.cx has a new purpose!
      • No, I'm talking about buying a Senator, perhaps the old-fashioned way (campaign bribery), or maybe just by building a national constituency for policies that favor us. Think "Senator Disney", but more like "Senator Linux". Since geeks disagree about so many non-tech policies, they'd be free to screw us on most other policies, so long as they tightened up the PTO, updated Betamax Law at the expense of the DMCA, reduced Homeland Security and Patriot Act to a purely defensive regime, and posted "4 Insightful"
      • if we engineered a coalition between Geeks, Greens, and Libertarians

        .. and people who own VCRs or CD burners? Yeah, you're right, there just isn't enough of them to make a difference.

    • That would be Boucher (D-VA) (Score:5, Informative)

      by MacDork ( 560499 ) on Friday October 08, 2004 @12:56AM (#10467454) Journal
      Rick Boucher [house.gov] of Virginia. He's running for re-election this year, so send him a few bucks. [boucherforcongress.com] I don't care if you are a R or a D, he's the only friend you've got up there. So contribute, and if you're in his district, go vote for him.

  • It ain't dead yet! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 07, 2004 @11:07PM (#10466977)
    Look, folks, this bill isn't dead yet. It's true that its scheduled committee vote was canceled, but Congress will reconvene briefly in November to pass several appropriations bills. Watch for the bill's supporters to try to tack it onto one of these big bills. If they can do that, it can easily sail through Congress as the end of the legislative session draws near, and Congress rushes to get necessary budget bills passed. This is a common tactic, and it often works.

    So don't even think of celebrating until Congress adjourns for the year.

  • True story: Words with my Senator (Score:5, Interesting)

    by DaHat ( 247651 ) on Thursday October 07, 2004 @11:11PM (#10467003)
    On Sunday I went to a lil rally for Senator Tom Daschle, a supporter of this bill sadly.

    I told him how concerned I was about Induce and asked why he was supporting it... he explained that some of his friends talked to him about their concerns regarding their losses due to piracy.

    Thankfully, he did say that that he didn't think the current revision of the bill was very good and did believe that more work was needed.

    We spoke for about 10 minutes on the issue (I think I miffed the national guardsman in line behind me).

    One interesting note... I mentioned the savebetamax campaign and he knew nothing about it... his aid admitted that they had received 'a few calls' on the topic... either they were lying... or not enough calls were made it seems.
    • Calls don't do shit. Donate a large amount of money to his PAC and you will get his attention. He, like most of the others in DC, are nothing but whores.

    • One interesting note... I mentioned the savebetamax campaign and he knew nothing about it... his aid admitted that they had received 'a few calls' on the topic... either they were lying... or not enough calls were made it seems.

      Unless you can get enough callers on a single issue to shut down the Capitol Hill switchboards (yes, it has happened!), you don't have enough calls to matter.

      If you want to make an impact, write. Write on paper, put it in an envelope, address it, put on a stamp and mail it. The

    • I hope you replied: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by IBitOBear ( 410965 )
      Senator, those friends "losses" are based on two peculiar propositions; the first is that nobody has ever bought music after hearing it for free; the second is that everybody who downloaded a song would have bought it if it weren't available on the net. I think you will agree that both of these propositions are laughable...

      That's the whole debunking in 15 seconds.
    • "he explained that some of his friends talked to him about their concerns regarding their losses due to piracy."

      Excuse me? 'His friends'?

      So, you're saying that a US Senator backs the creation of new rules from the banter over a beer and hand of poker?

      Explain to me again why America is supposed to be an example of a shining democracy? Or have you simply delivered yourselves into the hands of Plutocrats?

      "his aid admitted that they had received 'a few calls' on the topic"

      Easily deniable in the fac

  • what about the kids (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 07, 2004 @11:17PM (#10467041)
    Loved the bit: "So long as illegitimate peer-to-peer services hijack a positive technology and intentionally offload their legal liability to America's kids, legislation will be a priority for the creative community," Bainwol said. Oh yes the big bad p2p companys are forcing there wares onto unsuspecting kids. Forcing them into a life time of slavery to downloading copyright software.
    • It's their attempt at spin for "The RIAA is suing 12-year-old girls", basically saying that the P2P software makers are forcing them to sue children, and also saying it is positive technology while in the same breath wanting to ban it.

      There's so much spin in that one-sentence quote it almost makes one dizzy. You can see how it was a carefully crafted quotable.

  • Not just kids (Score:5, Insightful)

    by _Hellfire_ ( 170113 ) on Thursday October 07, 2004 @11:21PM (#10467060)
    From the Newsday Article:

    "So long as illegitimate peer-to-peer services hijack a positive technology and intentionally offload their legal liability to America's kids, legislation will be a priority for the creative community," Bainwol said.

    I know plenty of "grown-ups" (40 and 50 year olds) who ride the mule all the time.

    Of course these young-uns don't know any better and don't know that "stealing" music and movies is wrong.

    • Re:Not just kids (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Patrik_AKA_RedX ( 624423 ) on Friday October 08, 2004 @12:14AM (#10467309) Journal
      legislation will be a priority for the creative community," Bainwol said.
      I didn't know lobbying was a creative occupation. If we can't buy next generation burners in the US, we'll buy them from China. No matter how much noise they make or how oppresive their laws become, there will always be ways around their "protection" to get free music/movies. However the collateral damage of these laws will soon enough hit a critical level and backfire on the lobbyists.
      Let see if those who lose their jobs in the hardware industry will be as understanding about the **AA's need for "protection".
    • Of course these young-uns don't know any better and don't know that "stealing" music and movies is wrong.

      Or, alternatively, they don't believe it *is* wrong.

    • ...I think we have records as far back as ancient Greece saying how the "wild young ones" are destroying society.

      1) Grown-ups typically have more money, less spare time. That makes you more willing to pay as opposed to more time "working" downloading stuff.

      2) As a grown-up, you have a much better appriciation of the time value of money. I know myself that as a student, I spent hours saving pennies (to exaggerate a bit), while today I know what one hour of my time is worth.

      3) Grown-ups on average aren't a

  • EFF Action Center (Score:5, Informative)

    by skeeball ( 820126 ) on Thursday October 07, 2004 @11:34PM (#10467135)
    If you really care about this issue and I'm sure many of you do, please head on over to the EFF Action Center at www.eff.org [eff.org]. After a quick registration (tinfoil hats need not apply) you can pick a topic you care about and have the EFF automatically generate an email, letter, or fax to the representative and/or senator that is appropriate to you. Or customize the message if you wish. Either way, it only takes a few clicks.

    I love it, it allows me to be politically active and relatively lazy at the same time.

  • What did we lose? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by macz ( 797860 ) on Thursday October 07, 2004 @11:35PM (#10467141)
    Whenever you pull your hand back out of this particular legal cookie jar and think you won, count your fingers... I am wondering what we lost in this fight. Surely the fat cats like Hatch who suckle at the teat of big Entertainment will simply re-introduce this and attach it to a "Free Day Care for Handicapped Children" bill or some such pablum.

    Can anyone say tactical retreat?

    Check out http://www.ipaction.org/ if you want to fight the power with the weapon of choice in this particular melee. Cold hard cash.

  • YES! (Score:4, Funny)

    by enjoilax ( 792737 ) on Thursday October 07, 2004 @11:43PM (#10467193) Homepage
    Ahhh my faith in humanity is restored again!
    *looks out window*
    Never mind.

  • Hatch is out (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 07, 2004 @11:47PM (#10467208)
    [posting anonlymously because I'm a senate staffer]

    Something worth mentioning - Sen. Hatch is outgoing chair of the Senate Judiciary committee. GOP rules limit chairmanships to 6 years, and his time is up. Sen. Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania is likely to be chairman in the next congress.

    There have been rumors that Hatch is pushing to reconstitute the intellectual property subcommittee, but even with a subcommittee chair he'll be alot less powerful next session than he is now. He could push bills out of his subcommittee and have them bottled in the full committee, or significantly modified during full committee markup.

    Specter isn't known for being in touch with IT/IP issues. This is a double edged sword. As committee chair he's likely to give significant leeway to Hatch on IP issues in order to focus on investigations and other legislation. Conversely, without strongly stated public views on copyright/IP issues, Specter will probably be receptive to lobbying. If the EFF/OSDN/Sun/Others effectively represent their issues, they'll be much better off with Chairman Specter than Chairman Hatch. If they blow it --- 6 more years of the same.

    A few wrinkles - Specter is up for election and may end up losing his seat. Also, Sen. Grassley is second in seniority on the Judiciary committee. Senators can only chair one committee at a time, and conventional beltway wisdom is that Sen. Grassley will not relinquish his current chairmanship (Finance) in order to take Judiciary, leaving it to Specter.

    • ANYONE is better than Hatch... (Score:5, Informative)

      by Ghostgate ( 800445 ) on Friday October 08, 2004 @01:08AM (#10467494)

      Hatch was the guy who wanted to remotely destroy people's computers if they were found to contain items that infringed on copyright. Yes, you read that right. Remotely destroy people's computers.

      I'm all for destroying their machines, Hatch said during a Committee hearing Tuesday. "'If you have a few hundred thousand of those, I think people would realize' the seriousness of their actions," the wire service quotes him as saying. (source [theregister.co.uk])

      • Hatch was the guy who wanted to remotely destroy people's computers if they were found to contain items that infringed on copyright.

        You give him too much credit. To say, "...if they were found to contain..." implies that a court of law or some kind of legal proceedings were involved. As I'm sure you're aware, he advocated a vigilante system wherein you could attack anyone you alone suspected of being naughty. The poor sap would then have to take you to court to prove that they were innocent (because th

  • Vox Populi, no doubt (Score:3, Funny)

    by tsm_sf ( 545316 ) * on Friday October 08, 2004 @12:12AM (#10467307) Journal
    "So long as illegitimate peer-to-peer services hijack a positive technology and intentionally offload their legal liability to America's kids, legislation will be a priority for the creative community," Bainwol said.

    before heading back into the studio to lay down a few more tracks, right?

  • think of the kids! (Score:5, Funny)

    by the-build-chicken ( 644253 ) on Friday October 08, 2004 @12:32AM (#10467377)
    <snip>hijack a positive technology and intentionally offload their legal liability to America's kids</snip>

    The kids...it's all about the kids...won't somebody please think about the kids!

  • Always ask yourself: (Score:2, Insightful)

    by shoolz ( 752000 )
    Who stands to benifit? (If passed into law)

    Network TV won't
    RIAA won't
    Public won't
    Hollywood won't
    Etc...

    So who will? The political forces that are pretending to support this outrageous and hokey cause?

    Am I insane, or am I so sane I just blew your mind? [ionline.net]

  • On the other end of the scale (Score:5, Informative)

    by Big Nothing ( 229456 ) <tord.stromdal@gmail.com> on Friday October 08, 2004 @02:19AM (#10467772)
    Meanwhile, Norway's government just made it's budget proposal where the music and film industry will be compensated by government funds for their losses due to private/personal copying.

    In the proposal, all forms of personal/private copying of copyrighted will be legalized, including P2P. Also, no further fees on recordable media (such as CD-R and DVD-R) will be introduced.

    If you understand Norwegian or have an excellent fish, you can read the article here: http://www.nrk.no/musikk/4149551.html [www.nrk.no].

    • Translation (and no, I'm not a 'fish) (Score:5, Informative)

      by Kjella ( 173770 ) on Friday October 08, 2004 @05:36AM (#10468307) Homepage
      Securing private CD-burning

      You may now freely copy your own CDs. Through the national budget the government proposes securing the private right to copy, and is allocating 32,5 MNOK (about 4,8M$) to rights holders.

      The proposal is appearing ahead of the departments own evaluation of a new copyright law by proposing a new compensation arrangement which will secure compensation to copyright holders for private copying.

      The iundustry overrun

      The government has thus chosen to not listen to the music industry, who was seeking to criminalize the private copying of music. The government has also chosen to not follow the industry's proposal of introducing a levy on different storage media, such as unrecorded CD and DVD records.

      When the department of culture in the spring of 2003 sent out a hearing with regards to new copyright law NRK.no/musikk wrote about a democratic deficit in the process. Of 126 hearing instances invited to have an opinion on the draft, only one represents the consumer; the small, idealistic organization Elektronisk Forpost Norge (EFF in Norway).

      Small voice heard

      Now David has won over Goliath. EFN has been heard on all their ideas of securing the consumers' rights.

      - This shows that it is not the number of arguments but the strength of the arguments that is decisive, says Bjørn Ramseth, VP of EFN.

      - The problems surrounding copyright is not simply a question of market- and technologyadoption.

      - It is first and foremost cultural policy. The decision belongs in parlament and not in the court room, something I'm happy that the goverment has realized, says Ramseth.

      More court cases

      - TONO, IPFI and several other rights holder organizations has chosen to sue individuals that have broken copyright law. Do you believe there will be an end to such suits and threats of lawsuits now?

      - No, I don't think so. The industry will all the time try to find new ways to sue people, because they seek to criminalize everything that has to do with file sharing.
      - But this will at least make it much harder for the industry to do so. At least in Norway.

      Great importance

      Copyright law is complex. This is not a case that has engaged the masses. Bjørn Ramseth think it'll take time before people realize how important this is.

      - File sharing is becoming more and more an integral part of our culture. We consider this as natural, despite great pressure from the music industry to make us percieve it as illegal and immoral. Now it is clearly decided that this is legal and okay.

      Complementary arrangements

      The department of culture writes that the new compensation arrangement must be seen in context with the grant of 19,5 MNOK to the "Fund for sound and images". The funds will be granted collectively by application, while the compensation will be individual.

      It is still unclear how one is to calculate the share of each composer, text writer and artist should be granted for private copying. Because how do you measure private copying? Should record sales decide? Or perhaps net based music sales? Or what about radio air time?

      The government will probably not use the download statistics from the still illegal peer-to-peer servers on the Internet.

      ----
      End article, begin personal comment

      WTF? Private copying is ok, but Internet is not? And while I do appriciate the deal, it seems like local musicians will be funded, while Britney et al get the shaft. Ah well another wierdo suggestion from the goverment. That's not new at least.

      Kjella
    • Put another way...

      The music and film industries in Norway will now be given a government subsidy for being too stupid to distribute their own products online in formats that don't suck ass. In exchange for this marvelous use of your money, the nation gets a reprieve from having half the population being labelled as criminals and sued for their last Norwegian øre. Brilliant!

  • "So long as illegitimate peer-to-peer services hijack a positive technology and intentionally offload their legal liability to America's kids, legislation will be a priority for the creative community," Bainwol said.

    I don't understand what he is talking about. What does it mean "to offload legal liability to kids"??? I don't get it. Could someone explain it to me?

    I'm not kidding or ironizing here, I really don't understand RIAA's point.

  • Is there anyone those in america can vote for who DONT support these stupid lame pro-big-corperation IP laws?

    And I mean someone who actually stands a remote chance of winning...

    Hopefully us aussies can kick howard out on saturday and get a government who is NOT pro-big-business on IP laws (although I dont see any specific statement one way or the other on this issue on the ALP website)
    • Yes.

      And, funny enough, if you'd read that article, you'd find out that someone in America could and did vote for someone who DOESN'T support these stupid lame pro-big-corporation IP laws.

  • Wanted this to pass (Score:5, Insightful)

    by dieatom ( 820174 ) on Friday October 08, 2004 @05:42AM (#10468321)
    Darn I was really hoping that this would pass. It opens up so many more doors for us. I for one think that I should be able to sue GM, Chryslar-Daimler, BMW and the rest for producing cars that go more then 65mph thus inducing me to speed. Those speeding tickets weren't y fault sir I was induced to speed. Let's not forget to sue fast food for inducing us to splurge and fatten ourselves due to their biggy size's. Gone is the age of individual responsibility /cheer. Let's not hold users accountable for their actions no no it is the saftware writers fault damn you naughty naughty geeks. This type of bill is why we get Redhat linux distro's unable to play mp3's and why SuSE pro 9.1 will not play a DVD right out of the box. This alone and well maybe the DMCA will do more to stifle innovation then any band of world war 2 germans.
  • First off, they need to reword in that it allows legal P2P. Whats wrong with my sharing a MP3 Recording of my Churches Worship Team playing? Nothing.

    Second, just because everyone does something, does not make it right. Being able to make MP3's off oc CD's you own should be legal. Giving your friend a copy for free should also be legal. Giving it to your 5 million closest friends online is one step too far! ;)
    • First off, they need to reword in that it allows legal P2P

      They need to _start_ with rewording it so that it doesn't make VCRs illegal! Then _maybe_ they'll be competent enough to handle the subtleties of computer communications protocols. If the first draft can't even handle 20-year old technology, there's no chance of it being good enough for computers.

      Second, just because everyone does something, does not make it right

      Very true, but before you go off telling umpteen millions of your own constiuent

Slashdot Top Deals

MS-DOS must die!

Close