Copyright Law Mashup Moving Through Congress 352
The Importance of writes "The INDUCE Act may be dead (for now), but that doesn't mean that Congress won't pass any copyright laws this year. Right now, HR 4077, the "Piracy Deterrence in Education" bill pulls together a number of different initiatives to not only get the government involved in civil copyright enforcement, but change fundamental definitions in copyright, and make certain types of home video viewing illegal. The Senate version (brought to you by Sen. Hatch and Leahy) adds even more copyright law changes. According to Public Knowledge, 'The recording industry and Hollywood are making headway! Threatening bills are positioned to move possibly today or tomorrow (yes, even Saturday!) in the Senate and we need your help, now. Not only do they want to rewrite copyright law (again) to lower the standard required for criminal enforcement of copyright infringement; but now they're changing how you watch TV or DVDs in your own home! The bills (H.R. 4077 and H.R. 2391) also are written to make the way you use iTunes and WiFi a crime. '"
blah (Score:5, Insightful)
-lk
There's a better way of spending that $20 (Score:2)
Dan Glickman gave some Congressmen $19.50 each to vote for these bills. We can turn the stinginess that makes him such an effective MPAA head ("I don't give a fuck how poor the orphanage is! Full price!" -> more profit) against him! We'll buy each Congressmen back with $20 each! Hell, combined with that vote-thingy we have, that might even be worth $20.05!
According to someone further down the thread, here are the names of the $19.50 richer
Re:As it has been it will be (Score:3, Funny)
Re:As it has been it will be (Score:5, Insightful)
Just kidding. i am playing devils advocate here and I agree with you 100%. Tons of our rights have been stripped away in the USA. However, we have to suck it up because the Dems and Repubs have a monopoly on the voting system and prevent 3rd party candidates.
Our law makers pretty much just give in to whoever has the most cash and let the courts (our tax dollars) pick the winner in disputes. However, most of our judges are corrupted as well. Some supreme judges ruled that corporations have "freedom of speech" and are allowed to give bribes (campaign contributions), to the law makers. It is really sad that a non-human (corporation) is given _MORE_ rights in the USA then a US citizen. As a US Marine, I say it is time for a revolution to take back what is ours.
Re:As it has been it will be (Score:3, Interesting)
Having just read much of the transcript from the session, I am appalled at how out of touch our lawmakers are with their constituents!
At no time did they reflect on how distorted the current laws are! At no time did any representative ask if this would help the public good! At no time did they consider if this would help promote the creative arts!
They did reflect that it would increase H$$llyw$$d revenue. And artists themselves get 8 cents each.
Do they ONLY represent
it's because.... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:As it has been it will be (Score:5, Insightful)
I think the topic of this discussion is a side-effect. I think, the question this all starts with is: how can you stop American politicians from being legally bribed?
It's really obvious looking from the outside in that America is rotting, it's more difficult to see from the inside because the ones that are trying to control the government, and succeeding in my opinion, are the ones that feed you information through TV.
You guys and girls have to do something because it's going to influence the rest of the world when America, with it's giant military/industrial complex is going to hell. You either vote for Republicans so they speed up the nastyness and it's obvious to everyone. Or you have to slowly take back control. We've already had a Hitler and it gets pounded into us at school, the events that lead up to his rise to power. You want to have a live example before you realize? Or take our word for it that it's not such a good idea.
It's so obvious to outsiders that republicans are lyars, and we're like, "why can't Americans see the truth?".
Re:As it has been it will be (Score:2, Insightful)
Alright, so it won't actually stop a politician from being bribed, but it can make you feel real good aftwards.
Re:As it has been it will be (Score:5, Interesting)
It's obvious to many of us on the inside also. You have to remind yourself that like it or not, America was founded by Puritans for Puritans. The fact that others came and flourished was almost an after thought. We do have separation of church and state, but it's pretty much laughed at since day one. Seriously, we have "under God" in our pledge (though introduced in the 1950's) and have had "in God we trust" on all of our currency since long before I was born.
However, the Republicans still appeal to these people. The religious folks say, "I'm glad he took out those damn Arabs... I'm glad he's against Roe v. Wade... I'm glad he believes in supporting 'faith baised' organizations." Thus, they are able to completely ignore all other facts. Keep in mind, many of these people are the same folks who believe that the Earth was created in under 7 days.
Re:As it has been it will be (Score:5, Insightful)
This is something I see all the time. You are confused. Separation of church and state, does not mean that state can not make reference to, or imply that others worship in a church. The sole intent of this is to prevent a) a national religion, b) ensure that government does not trample on the rights of other religions, c) ensure that government is not unduly influenced by church authority (eg, the Pope/Vatican), and d) ensure that those that do, or do not, practice a religion, are not persecruted by members of government.
Specifically, as it relates to your pledge reference, it does not qualify, any more than references to god on a coin means anything, from a government perspective. This is a historically accurate statement and seeingly, recently (and historically) re-enforced by the SC.
Those that seem to take your wacky, hardline position, to me, see as far out in left field as the wacky religious zealots are in right. Simple fact is, those trying to take "god" references off of money and out of the pledge are attempting to serve their own corrupt agenda and hide behind ignornance of "seporation of church and state".
Re:As it has been it will be (Score:3, Insightful)
You have to remember over 50% of the voters, voted against BUSH, and more voted for GORE than BUSH. Yet due to the screwed-up Electorial College (which may have served a purpose long ago but is useless now), we unfortunately got BUSH.
Re:As it has been it will be (Score:4, Interesting)
As someone who was (and to an extent, still is) an American-ophile (is that a word?) the whole situation is really distressing me. The parent is right IMO about the problem beginning with the legal bribing of politicians.
I think the problems would almost entirely stop if the US banned political donations from corporations. The INDUCEs, the DMCAs, the targeted top end tax cuts, even the Iraq War.
I know many Americans are going to be saying that "why the hell should we listen to him? He's a foreigner, he should have no say". Well, fair enough, except you're exporting both your Corporation-centric laws [ustr.gov] and, quite obviously, your foreign policy [google.com]. There's also your environmental policy [upi.com]. When the US sneezes, the rest of us get covered in slobber.
And the rot stems from the politicians trying to keep the big donators happy - the big business end of town. That's the goal for politicians now in the US. But it's not making Americans happy; it is, as the parent said, rotting the US from the inside. If making your corporations the centre-piece of your country at the expense of everything else had a benefit for the country, then great. But it doesn't. It makes people unhappy. Dead kids coming back in body bags from Iraq. Assault weapons legally available for sale on the streets. No international environmental laws (like Kyoto), even though your country is getting pounded by hurricanes. Even little things, like being unable to copy your CDs to your iPod. It all stems from too much money corrupting the democratic process.
I never thought I'd say this, but I am looking forward to the day when China provides a counter-balance to the US's might. The Chinese goal of doing what's best for the state, as opposed to the new US goal since the end of the Cold War of doing what's best for the corporation, is probably going to be more world friendly than the present US position.
Ask yourself - since Bush has come to power, what positive or great thing has been achieved in the world? There's a mess in Iraq, a mess in Afghanistan, no Kyoto while the Florida Quays sinks under hurricanes, trade wars with Europe... he's leading your country, and with it the world, into disaster.
-- james
Re:As it has been it will be (Score:4, Interesting)
I think the problems would almost entirely stop if the US banned political donations from corporations. The INDUCEs, the DMCAs, the targeted top end tax cuts, even the Iraq War.
I think you'll find that there are three categories of people on this matter. One, those that are informed, will completely agree with you. Sadly, most Americans are ignorant, uneducated, and wish to remain as such (which, to me, suggest the right to vote bar should be raised, because our current system is NOT what our forefathers intended. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. Period.). Which is the second category. That is, the ignorant slobs, which happily ignore this, inspite of efforts to educate, because they simply don't care. And third, is the people that benefit from this corrupt system.
Long story short, there are two minorities that are involved here. One minority is the group that wants to stop this horrible form of "legal" corruption. The second minority are those in government which benefit from it. Sadly, it's the second group with all the power. This leaves the "unwashed masses" as our only hope. Needless to say, these are the people most easily swayed by the power of the corrupt beneficiaries.
And so, it's leaves us (Americans) in a horrible position. By allowing everyone in the US to vote, a lot of power was removed form the hands of the people that were purposely put in power to prevent this type of abuse. Originally land owners were the only ones with the right to vote. While I can't say that I think such a qualification is just, today, I can say that I believe there should be some such qualification required for the right to vote. In fact, I think it should be an earned privelege to the responsible rather than a given right. Liberty is something we must all work to ensure. It is not given. It is not free. Likewise, the right to vote should be entrusted to those that earn it. Exactly what earning the right should be, I can't say, but our current system is horribly corrupt and broken. No doubt about that. And the majority of our ignorant masses ensures that it stays that way.
In a day when companies have more rights than people and a select few wield more power than the "voting population", whereby, power has already been removed form the hands of the very people (the voting populas) that are supposed to balance the government and corrupt leaders, I can't see that my ideas are any worse. Heck, they actually are more inline with the principals our whole government was originally built on, than what we currently have today.
Re:As it has been it will be (Score:4, Insightful)
Classic retort. I love how whenever anyone questions the Republicans that someone always has to say something like the Democrats are just as bad.
But the sad thing is that even as little as 20 years ago this was more true than it is now. The neo-cons have turned the republican party into a farce of what it's values were supposed to represent. Smaller government, more freedom (ie liberty), national independence (ie a self-sustaining nation).
It's easy to point at the Democrats and say they have done bad things because all politicians have but the simple fact of the matter is that the Republicans have done more damage to the liberty, safety, and overall strength of the USA than anyone else has in recent history. And all for the glory, power, and wealth of the few. Stick that in your pipe and smoke on it for a while.
Re:As it has been it will be (Score:5, Interesting)
This isn't a flamebait. It just a question; what do people do in the place you are to keep the political process working and balanced?
I'm writing to you from the Netherlands. Hi.
The best way to answer your question is to point out the differences between our countries:
- We don't allow anyone to give money to our politicians. In the US there are ways for someone to give money to politicians. This is the "legally bribed" part I mentioned earlier. Giving someone money is a good way to make them do your bidding so the most important part of your answer is already in your question.
- We have a culture of being very critical of everything in the Netherlands. We always have an opinion on everything and we need to know the ins and outs of a certain subject before we're satisfied that we've been told the truth. Handy for keeping our government honest, not so good in emergency situations (is that siren really indicating an emergency, i'm not so sure, investigation time).
- We have complete seperation of church and state, and as another poster noted, the US doesn't. When you think about it, religion isn't very democratic. The bible is full of kings and there's the ultimate king who's always right and who's word is always law. It's also a bit totalitarian (god is always watching and sees everything you do). Another reason religion has no place in government is because reality is always changing, the bible has only been updated once and that was a long time ago.
- Ofcourse we have corrupt politicians or people who want to be. The best way for them to keep their illegal income is to hide the fact that they're on the take. Like I said, we're critical in the Netherlands and it shows in the way we treat politicians. When you think about it, they're just human beings like you and me. Most of the time they're not even smarter than us, just more educated or better connected. In my country they have a certain level of fame, ofcourse, but mostly we have the attitude of: "do your job of managing the country, if you don't do it well or you lie about it, we fire you and you can find another job". In contrast, what I can see from the U.S. mindset, everyone's like: "OMG OMG, it's the president of the United States, a demi-god right here among us, WOW, I just saw the emperor of earth on TV". As far as I know, not enough people have been fired for lying or not doing their job (Irak, September 11). U.S. politicians are still lying and getting away with it. A sig from another
- The average education level of the population here is higher than the average level in the U.S. This, together with the religion thing, the non-firing of lyars and the uncritical thinking of the population. It leads to the bamboozling/spinning of the voters. If voters can be made to believe in this political disneyworld where everything is fine and the president is always right, then why would they need to be honest? They can just spin some more and everyone will still vote for them. As I said in my original post, most Dutch just can't believe so many people are voting for Republicans, I guess we're not in their "reality distortion field".
- Corporations have less influence on politics in the Netherlands, corporations are very organized and better connected than citizens. They can make a bigger lobbying fist than us.
My advice, Stop trying to fix symptoms like the Induce Act, you're spending precious political energy on the wrong thing. Use obvious wrongs like the induce act as examples of why the core issues should be tackled.
The core issues, in my opinion
Re:As it has been it will be (Score:5, Insightful)
Excellent post. (Score:5, Interesting)
A few random observations:
- I don't think the "treatment of fame" issue is unique to politicians in the US; it seems to apply to business and media celebrities as well. I suspect it's a side-effect of the "Land of Opportunity" myth that's so pervasive in the US; if success is achieved (only) through talent and hard work, anybody with wealth/influence must automatically deserve it. (And, conversely, anybody without wealth or influence is either stupid or lazy and hence not worth bothering about.)
- I *do* worry that the problems seen in the US are at least partly a result of the concentration of power there relative to the size of the economy. Assuming for the sake of argument that all politicians everywhere are equally corrupt, a dollar spent bribing a US Congressman to pass a pro-corporate law will have a far greater payoff than the same dollar spent bribing a Dutch representative, so it stands to reason that corporations would invest a lot more time and money on manipulating the US. I'm generally in favour of European integration, but this issue does bother me. The EC's combined economy is bigger than the USA's; if policymaking becomes similarly concentrated, we can expect to see similar levels of lobbying. Look at the recent pressure on software patents, for example.
- I think you could have made more of the freedom of the press. The Reporters Without Borders 2003 report [rsf.org] makes for interesting reading. The Netherlands are joint first for press freedom; the USA is at 31.
Incidentally, I live in the United Kingdom. Politically and socially we're somewhere in between the US and the Netherlands, but from here the Dutch extreme looks vastly more appealing.
Re:Excellent post. (Score:3, Interesting)
(OK, OK, Ian Paisley notwithstanding as well.)
Your second point, alas, is all too true. Buy the US government, get the UK government absolutely FREE!
Re:As it has been it will be (Score:3, Interesting)
Do you put reporters in jail when they write about political payoffs in the newspapers?
Of course not! It is even extremely rare that a reporter gets threatened by court to reveal his sources, and I can't offhand recall an instance where the reporter was actually forced to do that.
Do you have no corrupt politicians?
Of course we do - they're human, after all. But the other reply to your post makes clear what we do about them. Last cabinet formation it tu
Re:As it has been it will be (Score:2)
It's the new punk - If you pick up on it quick, you can claim you were there.
Yes But (Score:3, Funny)
umm... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:umm... (Score:2)
Re:umm... (Score:2, Funny)
If you don't vote for the oak tree, the terrorists WIN!
Re:umm... (Score:2)
You'll all come grovelling to California, on your hands and knees.
Re:umm... (Score:5, Informative)
OK that does it. (Score:5, Insightful)
but MAKING something that we already do ILLEGAL? Who do they think they are, The Sheriff of Nottingham?
They're bringing doom upon themselves. Soon many (WAY MANY) Robin Hoods from outside the US will crush them and take from them whatever they love the most: Money.
INDUCE Act a decoy (Score:5, Insightful)
Cannot skip content (Score:5, Insightful)
If the people living in the states of the politicians sponsoring this mess would vote them out, maybe the fascist/socialist elements in our government will finally be 'mashed'.
Re:Cannot skip content (Score:4, Insightful)
If there is an implied arrangement to watch an ad in return for a service, then I guess, from one point of view, this is justifiable (if not currently legal), however offensive we may find it. Obviously, an "implied arrangment" is not a contract, hence the need to change the law.
Title III designates the national tree as the oak tree.
That's an interesting thing to be pinned to this...
Title VI, the "Preservation of Orphan Works Act" (H.R. 5136)... allow libraries to create copies of certain copyrighted works, such as films and musical compositions that, in their last twenty years of copyright term, are no longer commercially exploited, and are not available at a reasonable price.
This modifies Sonny Bono Copyright Extension Act (1998), which extended copyright after the author's death by 20 years, to 70. This provision is a commonsense development. Of course, I hope that "reasonable price" is effectively defined.
Re:Cannot skip content (Score:5, Insightful)
OK, and the rest of my $60/mo cable/sat bill (with no 'net service) goes to what, if not content?
Re:Cannot skip content (Score:2)
Contracts can not override Constitutional rights, and for that matter, neither can Congressional bills.
No sane intepretation of the right to free speech, despite the common phrase we use to identify that right, can fail to include the right to listen to whomever we choose, or not listen to whomever we choose. (My ow
Re:Cannot skip content (Score:2)
Since this bill goes through. That's the fun things about bills, they make illegal things that weren't previously illegal.
Re:Cannot skip content (Score:2)
DEMAND full enforcement of this law!
Then watch the outrage - or the laughter.
Re:Cannot skip content (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Cannot skip content (Score:2)
The Supreme Court has already considerd this issue in: Sony Corp. v. Universal City Studios, Inc. A quick Google search brought up this article [findlaw.com]. They found that time shifting was acceptable and not significantly harmful to copyright holders.
Of course, Congress could change this by passing this stupid bill. Whether or not today's Supreme Court would hold the same view as in the SONY case is a big unknown.
Re:Cannot skip content (Score:2)
So if fast forwarding around an advert is illegal, is switching channels to avoid an advert illegal too? Not to mention falling asleep again.
Stupid idiots...
Why not sue? (Score:5, Interesting)
It really isn't yours if you can't skip parts, is it?
Re:Why not sue? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Why not sue? (Score:2)
Re:Why not sue? (Score:2)
Re:Why not sue? (Score:2)
Plus, I am in Texas at that would make discovery very difficult and expensive.
Re:Why not sue? (Score:5, Funny)
After all their TV ads almost all say OWN on DVD today.
It will never work. You aren't licensed to use their commercials as evidence in a court of law.
article is misleading (Score:2, Interesting)
Actually, copyright is automatic, but you need a way to prove it. I
Re:article is misleading (Score:4, Insightful)
A common myth. You could put anything in a package, unsealed, mail it to yourself, getting the postmark. At any later time you could replace the contents and then seal it. Unless you can find a way to prove you mailed a sealed package, it doesn't prove anything.
But you can just ask someone (anyone, but a notary would of course be better) to sign and date the bound copy (or each page), or chop and sign on a seal.
Someday soon (Score:5, Funny)
Oh yeah, and I'll move my house to a remote island. Underground. Not in missile silo--they know about all those. It will be my own hole, with recycled air, long-term water and food storage, and thermal power generation.
In your future days of mandatory digital compliance, on some rare night, you may have sweet dreams of someone on a remote island whose voice still echoes through the sprinkling mist.
Sheer Greed (Score:5, Insightful)
Seriously, you could argue that the advertising reduces the cost of the product, and therefore users must view them. But where does it end? Would you force people to spend 15 seconds looking at the ad on the side of a bus before they get on?
Bottom line: advertisers should NEVER have the power to force people to look at their ads, lest our lives become a living hell.
Re:Sheer Greed (Score:2)
Though I do remember something like getting $1 off a chicken sandwich at Burger King if you would "cluck". So maybe that's not too far off.
AHA! my evil master plan is working! (Score:5, Insightful)
If they keep this up it'll be illegal to watch movies or listen to music anywhere other than the theatre!
wifi = re-emitting as electromagnetic radiation,
light = electromagnetic radiation,
therefore your television = broadcast station, same as an AP.
Now if we can just fool them into legislating that you can't watch movies at the theatre, or listen to a home stereo either, we'll have em.
Somebody want to invent / commercialize an ultrasonic WiFi or bluetooth protocol compatable network? That should trigger legislation to kill all audio systems
Time to use those guns to assert your rights (Score:2, Informative)
This usually happens before a civil war of some sort.
If I buy music, I should be able to do any damn thing I want with it, short of copying it for friends. I should get an automatic right to use it within my house, on my person or in my car however I want. I should be able to turn one purchase into several different formats for my use, at my own cost. The same goes for videos and DVD
Re:Time to use those guns to assert your rights (Score:2)
There's only one thing you can legally do to get rid of them. Vote.
Re:Time to use those guns to assert your rights (Score:3, Insightful)
Until you know why we elected corruptable men to office, voting them out of office will probably result in different corrupt men in office.
Re:Time to use those guns to assert your rights (Score:2, Insightful)
The government hasn't taken away any of your weapons. They just haven't given you new ones to keep up to date with the latest military technology.
Thus, you can't go down to the store and buy an ICBM, an aircraft carrier, a 1MT thermonuclear warhead or an M1 tank.
If you think that either (a) it would be a good idea to ma
This might be a good thing, in the very long run. (Score:2, Insightful)
It'll still suck for the next ten years, I admit.
coralized, for your protection (Score:3, Informative)
mitch
What about books? (Score:5, Interesting)
I have a hard time imagining that things could become that preposterous with printed material, but media is media, right?
I'd like to think I'm just being silly.
Fast-forwarding through commercials (Score:5, Informative)
The fact that such a clause should even be necessary points to the warped mindset of the **AAs, of course.
It could be useful to paint the bill as the "It will make it illegal to fast-forward through commercials!!" to get the word out.
IANAL, so I could very well be wrong.
Re:Fast-forwarding through commercials (Score:3, Funny)
Damn right, if you won't let me see breast on Superball, you better let me skip those monestat commercials.
Re:Fast-forwarding through commercials (Score:2)
Additionally, this is sort of a "testing of the waters". Having the exp
Re:Fast-forwarding through commercials (Score:2)
Infringement seems to still involve distribution, not private in-home use. "distribution to the public" clauses abound.
One part that does concern me is that it looks like distributing only one copy of a pre-release copyrighted work to fall under the new penalties. Having a movie before it has been released to home video falls under this.
"the defendant knew or should have known that the
It is not 'useful' at all (Score:2)
Misleading others to promote your opinion is not useful. It is actually quite damaging. Most people don't appreciate being lied to. If you lie about one part, all other parts of your argument will loose force when the lie is discovered. You're right though... It doesn't appear to make skipping commercials illegal, as long as you don't save a copy with the commercials clipped.
Worsens penalties (Score:5, Informative)
Right. Because there's still a FEW crimes out there that actually have bigger penalties than copyright infringement! I know - I'm as shocked as the rest of you.
In all seriousness, WHY do you suppose copying a copyrighted music file illegally is already a felony in most cases (along with things like murder, kidnapping, and rape), whereas running into a store and swiping the actual CD is just a simple misdemeanor?
For those few who will no doubt comment on this article and say "blah blah, good - people swapping files are criminals and should be punished" I ask you this - does the punishment even come CLOSE to fitting the crime?
And now they want to make the punishment even more harsh?
This is not justice. It's a joke.
Re:Worsens penalties (Score:2)
Re:Worsens penalties (Score:3, Insightful)
"potential" be damned, you can't attach penalties for "potential" and regardless of where you got the media it can be spread, why isn't the kid who shoplifts a cd charged with a felony if he has a computer? He has the potential to rip it and distribute it.
Re:Worsens penalties (Score:2)
Re:Worsens penalties-The "scoping" trial. (Score:2, Interesting)
Erm, you don't get it do you. So what if I sent out a billion copies of the next Britaney Shears Song? It does not even REMOTELY come close to the effect of my killing a person.
So you are saying that your life is merely worth the same as an arbitary number of digital copies of some media?
If that's the case it is really very sad to be you.
Re:Worsens penalties-The "scoping" trial. (Score:5, Insightful)
But that's not really the issue here - because even if I could walk out with 100 CDs, and then went and distributed just ONE song to just ONE person... well, the penalty for the latter is still significantly more severe, and that's not right.
So how much crime does there have to be, before the punishment does fit the crime, and why is the line drawn so arbitrarily?
I don't know how much there has to be, but it has to be a LOT more than this. They can already sue for damages up to $150,000 per SONG. That's before I even get into potential prison sentences.
Not only that, but there is not even a direct correlation between a shared song and lost revenue. Some songs shared influence people to buy a CD - and so that shared song actually earned revenue. Then there are others who do replace the purchase of the music, and cause lost revenue. The majoriy make no difference, as they would not have been purchased anyway. Now in that last case, I'm not saying it's still "right" to go ahead and do it. I'm just trying to put this into the proper perspective.
A CD stolen from a store, on the other hand, IS lost revenue, plain and simple. Not to mention it's probably 10-15 songs that are stolen. The CD also has the same potential to be illegally distributed as the audio files do, since it's a simple matter to create the files once you have the CD.
But back to my original analogy - do you really think copyright infringement is a crime on par with murder and rape? How can any SANE person think that?
Re:Worsens penalties-The "scoping" trial-II (Score:2)
The main flaw with that reasoning is this: since when do we prosecute people based on how bad their crime MIGHT be? If someone is pulled over for speeding, do we say "I caught you at 80 MPH, but you had the potential to be going 100 MPH, so I'm doubling your fine." or "Well, since you were speeding here, you'll probably be speed
Copyright law, as with everything else... (Score:2, Informative)
I'm oh-so-glad there's no DMCA in Canada.
Re:Copyright law, as with everything else... (Score:2)
Insert catchy subject here (Score:5, Insightful)
With that said, yes, they can not force you to watch these ads and I do not believe there should be laws created to guarantee you can't bypass these commercials. I for one did NOT sign any agreement with any television broadcasting company saying that in exchange for free entertainment I would inturn watch their brain washing commercials.
What happened to our representatives representing the PEOPLE. Though corporations might have some of the same rights as a person (though not being held to their crimes like a person) they do not qualify as a person and should not be represented as one by our politicians.
This government was created by and for the people and I for one do not feel that these types of laws represent the best interest of 99.99% of the population of the United States. Tax payers money should not be spent on educating children on copyright laws. 1) It's ineffective, we've all been to school.... 2) Why not start spending tax payers money of educating kids at school on why product A is better than product B?? Or better yet they can teach us about Jesus!!!
Maybe there should be some laws seperating corporations from state as we do with religion and state. And for the same reasons too....
Not just corporations in HR4077 (Score:2)
(a) Offense- Whoever, without the authorization of the copyright owner, knowingly uses or attempts to use an audiovisual recording device in a motion picture theater to transmit or make a copy of a motion picture or other audiovisual work protected
Re:Insert catchy subject here (Score:3, Insightful)
Tax payers money should not be spent on educating children on copyright laws.
Change 'educating' to 'brainwashing' and you've got it exactly.
barrage (Score:2, Interesting)
Isn't the frequency of restrictive copyright-related law proposed in US a bit too high?
New civilian policy: the anti-ad (Score:3, Interesting)
Since this is an attempt to keep ad revenues on a failing delivery system, why not make the proposed 'enforced wathing' irrelevant by boycotting EVERY product advertised on these media.
Of course this means everyone will have to switch to sodas like 'Big Red' or buy cars like Suzuki or Kia, if the advertisers realize their ads actually have a negative revenue generation they will stop placing ads on these media.
Contact your representatives (Score:2, Informative)
Amazing one-two punch here (Score:5, Interesting)
I am a software industry veteran, and I consider myself an activist for copyright reform. And I can't even keep track of these bills, get up to speed on the issues and be on top of things fast enough before they roll out another one. This is attrition tactics by the media industry - they know that eventually, they'll slip one through right before a big holiday weekend when nobody's paying attention, or when some news story in their favor came out the week before. If they just keep getting their shills to propose these bills, like feces thrown at a wall, eventually something will stick.
I want to find candidates to vote for and promote who have reasonable IP policies that promote a balance between a business' right to make money on its investment and the interest of the commons and the citizenry, but it's pretty hard to find these candidates. I know a lot of us here give money to the EFF, but where is this money going? Besides Rep. Boucher of VA, what friends do we have on Capitol Hill, and how do we make more?
Maybe we need to be approaching people earlier on in their political careers, and running broader grass roots campaigns to bring public attention to copyright issues with issues of broad interest like the attempts to kill your right to tape shows in your own house, or the death of our heritage of freely available songs and characters in the form of a cultural commons, which have fueled the imaginations of artists throughout this century, only to be killed by the businesses built on those artists' work.
I accept that copyright law is never going to be of as immediate concern as health insurance, skyrocketing medical costs, nuclear proliferation, rising unemployment and thousands of people dying in war. But we need to make people realize that this is an issue of interest to all of us and that while we are worrying about those immediate problems facing us, certain industries are cynically trying to slip through legislation against the public interest in the hopes that we are too distracted to take action against them.
Product Placement (Score:2, Interesting)
Now, the affirmative right to watch and skip parts of the content that a consumer has legally obtained only exists if certain conditions are met: no commercial or promotional ads may be skipped.
With product placement becoming more common in movies, does that mean that if we start running a movie we're required to watch the entire thing? That would be a problem for me because sometimes I'll pop a DVD in and skip to my favorite parts.
Won't someone think of the trees? (Score:3, Interesting)
That's right, this is actually part of the "Piracy Deterrence and Education Act". Declaring the national tree. How can you even try to enact any reasonable legislation if you can't have a bill be about one single thing?
Re:Won't someone think of the trees? (Score:2)
Remember, most of the people who represent us don't have the time to read every fucking piece of legislation that crosses their desk. These things are hundreds of pages long. They look to those whom they ow
Re:Won't someone think of the trees? (Score:2)
Copyright warning (Score:2)
Obligatory quote (Score:5, Insightful)
We need to keep repeating this to everyone we can. Its a truth that needs 100 million repetitions.
-I.V.
I would like to propose a new rule... (Score:2)
How to garner public support for an !public bill (Score:2, Insightful)
Title III designates the national tree as the oak tree.
Instruct our "free" media to tell everyone about the bill:
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/09/28/natio
It's good to know we can trust the media in this free country, eh?
So why not do What's Needed? (Score:2)
Promptly pick up the phone and call your Senator. I did. Took all of 2 minutes and I footed the bill for the call, elapsed time 1:11. Seriously, If your Senator read Slash, we'd never have these problems, but they more than likely do not do so, so exercise something other than your modems and make the effort, the same time it takes to type a reply to my message is more then enough for 99% of you to Google, your Senator http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_i
The big picture (Score:3, Informative)
- p.411, Ayn Rand, ATLAS SHRUGGED, Signet Books, NY, 1957
Time for a democratic system of government? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:USA society at its best... (Score:2)
Re:Open Letter to Sen. Hatch (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Almost had me talked into it (Score:5, Informative)
Feel free to message me [slashdot.org] with any additional information.
Regards,
Tom
Re:Almost had me talked into it (Score:2)
I suggest that you run th
Re:Almost had me talked into it (Score:2)
Here is a PDF of the page [216.138.229.143] I just printed.
Or is it your browser that's buggy???
Re:Almost had me talked into it (Score:3, Informative)
*I* never suggested you were a kook :)
Here is what happens to your data on publicknowledge.org:
MOD PARENT TROLL (Score:4, Informative)
Re:MOD PARENT TROLL (Score:2)
Cheers, Gene
Re:Almost had me talked into it (Score:2)
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Well, it looks like ballot and jury aren't working anymore...
Re:Almost had me talked into it (Score:2)
Re:Almost had me talked into it (Score:2)
Cheers, Gene
Re:Who will enforce it? (Score:2)