Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Media Industry Wants Mandated Spyware and More

timothy posted more than 4 years ago | from the give-'em-an-inch-they-take-a-file dept.

The Media 373

An anonymous reader writes "The joint comment filed by the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) and the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) requests anti-infringement software on all home computers, pervasive copyright filtering, border searches, forced US intellectual property policies on foreign nations and a joint departmental agency to combat infringement during major releases." The MPAA would also like to have its rent paid a bit by Congress, with a ban on what seems to me like a useful tool (for those in as well as outside the film industry), the recently-discussed futures market for box-office receipts.

cancel ×

373 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Sounds like mad men (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31881146)

Indeed.

Re:Sounds like mad men (4, Interesting)

Pikoro (844299) | more than 4 years ago | (#31881280)

Actually, it sounds like a great idea. No wait, here me out:

People who want peace of mind to not be sued for something they're not sure they did or not could install and run it on their system since they aren't going to actively download infringing content anyways.

The rest of us, will simply download a cracked version of this watchdog software which, when it runs, never finds anything. Hence, "the pirates" enjoy the same protection from the xxAA that the ignorant get.

"But your honor, my client downloaded and ran the program provided by the prosecution and it never found any infringing content. Clearly any content found on my client's hard drive is legal or it would have been automatically deleted."

Re:Sounds like mad men (1)

Noxn (1458105) | more than 4 years ago | (#31881320)

Actually, you got a point.

Re:Sounds like mad men (3, Interesting)

netsharc (195805) | more than 4 years ago | (#31881350)

Makes me think of the movie Brazil... in the xxAA future you'll go to jail or not based on a boolean return value.

Of a closed source program.

Re:Sounds like mad men (5, Insightful)

rtfa-troll (1340807) | more than 4 years ago | (#31881356)

There is method in their madness. They ask for the moon and then, whilst you are arguing about how outrageous that is, they slip 100 dollars out of your pocket. Even if you catch them, the police just shrug their shoulders "100 dollars sounds like a pretty good price for the moon sir; what are you complaining about? Now please move along and let's not have any funny business".

Sometimes the position of the pirate party looks more and more sensible.

Re:Sounds like mad men (5, Funny)

flyneye (84093) | more than 4 years ago | (#31881388)

I think they can "want" in one hand and sh*t in the other hand and see which hand fills up first.
How about what I want for a change?
I "want" everyone involved with the *IAA to be gelded so their genetics are not passed on to further generations.
I "want" constant IRS scrutiny of all their books.
I "want" constant webcam surveillance of every room in their houses, their cars, their offices and GPS bitch collars so their whereabouts can always be known.
I "want" those who would invade my privacy to have their skin peeled off and used for lampshades in my house.

Re:Sounds like mad men (5, Funny)

Sulphur (1548251) | more than 4 years ago | (#31881434)

I call prior art.

This is hilarious (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31881436)

Seriously, this is all to be done in the name of protecting movies? Not nuclear secrets or D-Day invasion plans, but movies? I don't want whatever it is they've been smoking, as it's clearly too powerful and causes grandiose impairment of one's general reasoning abilities.

Puh-lease. They're acting like guarding the earning potential of Waterworld should rank right up there with National Security secrets.

Re:This is hilarious (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31881558)

The National Security secrets concern the measures in place to protect the earning potential of Waterworld.

That's nice. (5, Funny)

arcelios (1244426) | more than 4 years ago | (#31881156)

People in hell want ice water, too.

Oh Yeah? (5, Funny)

WrongSizeGlass (838941) | more than 4 years ago | (#31881162)

Well, fat chance. The government is not going to mandate big media sponsored spyware on everyone's computers. It would conflict with the DoJ & NSA software already installed ;-)

Re:Oh Yeah? (1)

cpghost (719344) | more than 4 years ago | (#31881254)

Nope, the already installed NSA or DoJ spyware will simply be "upgraded." ;-)

by over sea coders that will just mess it up or ma (2, Funny)

Joe The Dragon (967727) | more than 4 years ago | (#31881486)

by over sea coders that will just mess it up or make only work on system with the hardware / drivers that they have to test on.

Don't be TOO sure (4, Informative)

Runaway1956 (1322357) | more than 4 years ago | (#31881346)

Who remembers stoppoliceware.org ? (don't bother clicking - the site has been abandoned, and it's for sale now)

Word was, some years ago, that "Da gubbermint wants to install spyware on your computer to track what you do, and it will report if you have any pirated software, among other things"

Stoppoliceware was one part of a multipronged attack on that idea, and those politicians who were considering it seemed to have abandoned their idea. So, the site was neglected, and finally ceased to exist.

We see that whole thing coming back, around the world today. RIAA and their ilk are looking for antipiracy, but da gubbermint is willing to go along with that program, so that they can install monitoring software of their own.

Unless, of course, there is enough of an outcry against the concept. Australia and New Zealand have been pretty effective in blocking this kind of crap - but I have little faith in the US. So precious few people have the least clue regarding the issues, and those who have a clue often buy into the "Think of the children" nonsense.

Thank God (and Torvalds) for Linux. There won't be any spyware on my machine. The bastards can spy from my internet gateway, but that's as close as they get, unless they come in with a warrant. At that point, I'll most certainly be joining the revolution!

WHAT? (2)

Noxn (1458105) | more than 4 years ago | (#31881166)

WHAT ARE THEY SMOKING?

Re:WHAT? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31881204)

meta-amphetamines is my best bet

Re:WHAT? (4, Insightful)

deniable (76198) | more than 4 years ago | (#31881324)

Just wait, they'll 'compromise' on a 'reasonable' solution that's probably better than they wanted in the first place.

Re:WHAT? (3, Informative)

hrvatska (790627) | more than 4 years ago | (#31881648)

WHAT ARE THEY SMOKING?

Better dope than most of us can afford.

Re:WHAT? (1)

prefec2 (875483) | more than 4 years ago | (#31881672)

They are not smoking anything. They snort. And even more they want all your money.

When is it going to happen dammit! (5, Insightful)

Cheerio Boy (82178) | more than 4 years ago | (#31881170)

When are these bastards going to be prosecuted for racketeering?

When are people going to finally be fed up with being treated like criminals for the sake of a greedy cartel of Suits that have no morals to speak of?

When are people going to finally wise up and put these assholes in their place?

Yeah...I know. I'm delusional because they hold almost all the cards and have the gooberment in their pockets.

Re:When is it going to happen dammit! (5, Insightful)

j0hnyquest (1571815) | more than 4 years ago | (#31881226)

Yeah...I know. I'm delusional because they hold almost all the cards and have the gooberment in their pockets.

That's the sad part :( This makes me want to not pay for next album or movie just that much more...

Re:When is it going to happen dammit! (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31881386)

Really? It's entertainment. Go find something that's actually important to get your panties in a wad over.

Damn, people, are we all that spoiled and unaware of the world around us?

Re:When is it going to happen dammit! (5, Insightful)

ScrewMaster (602015) | more than 4 years ago | (#31881568)

Really? It's entertainment. Go find something that's actually important to get your panties in a wad over.

Damn, people, are we all that spoiled and unaware of the world around us?

The problem is, it's not just entertainment. Or are you going to claim that the DMCA and the Sonny Bono Copyright Extension Act (among others) only affect entertainment??? The ramifications to this are far-reaching and very dangerous, if for no other reason than that they set a very bad precedent for other industries to follow. I'm very disappointed in my own country for even entertaining these ideas: they're morally and ethically defective and should be discarded out of hand.

Don't stop there. (5, Insightful)

khasim (1285) | more than 4 years ago | (#31881400)

This makes me want to not pay for next album or movie just that much more...

Instead of just not paying for it, don't watch it at all. Or don't listen to it.

If you don't like their tactics, do not provide them with an avenue to distribute their products.

Re:Don't stop there. (4, Interesting)

future assassin (639396) | more than 4 years ago | (#31881668)

Or just support independent/creative commons artists. I was living in and out of the box for a while until in the last week I discovered tons of free music here http://www.ektoplazm.com/section/free-music/ [ektoplazm.com] and here http://www.jamendo.com/en/ [jamendo.com] and metlabels http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&ei=nsrJS5TbF4jMsgOJr4XxAg&sa=X&oi=spell&resnum=0&ct=result&cd=1&ved=0CAwQBSgA&q=netlabels&spell=1 [google.ca]

Re:When is it going to happen dammit! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31881370)

When are these bastards going to be prosecuted for racketeering?

I don't have a problem with what they're doing 'cuz all my "digital stuff" seems to fall of a "virtual truck" right onto my hard drive. Go figure.

Re:When is it going to happen dammit! (1)

cranberryhiker (1000575) | more than 4 years ago | (#31881598)

Are you speaking of the media industry, ISP's, investment bankers, airlines, big pharma, or phone companies? Be clear, man! :-)

Re:When is it going to happen dammit! (1)

Cheerio Boy (82178) | more than 4 years ago | (#31881698)

Are you speaking of the media industry, ISP's, investment bankers, airlines, big pharma, or phone companies? Be clear, man! :-)

Heh. Good point. :-)

Here's a thought... Corporations have some of the rights of human beings so why not require that to have those rights they must be embodied by at least a single person within the company who has the ability to order anyone in the company to follow his instructions.

Then require that the embodied person(s) is/are held accountable for the actions of the corporation.

Not likely to get passed mind you but it would certainly motivate CEOs to clean up their company ethics. (Or install them if they aren't already installed.)

Not very soon. (-1, Flamebait)

prefec2 (875483) | more than 4 years ago | (#31881700)

Let me answer your questions:

1. It is not called racketeering it is called capitalism. The same things are happening in other places as well.

2. As long as people are frightened by terrorists, various diseases, house prices, jobs and each other, they will not have enough time or capacity to do that. Even more the TV is keeping their brains off. So they will not rise until we run out of oil.

3. When the oil runs out (same as 2)

Hmm ... (1)

daveime (1253762) | more than 4 years ago | (#31881172)

A joint comment by me and my dog Boog has just been filed on Slashdot.

"RIAA and MPAA, go fuck yourselves".

Thank you for your time.

Re:Hmm ... (2, Informative)

Noxn (1458105) | more than 4 years ago | (#31881238)

In the name of me and the internet, we too would like to file a comment here.

"RIAA and MPAA, go fuck yourselves".

Thanks.

Re:Hmm ... (1)

daveime (1253762) | more than 4 years ago | (#31881374)

I'm sure glad EULA's aren't enforceable, or I'd owe you 3 dollars already.

Re:Hmm ... (1)

Noxn (1458105) | more than 4 years ago | (#31881508)

They arent? Then why does everyone have them?

Re:Hmm ... (2, Funny)

Sponge Bath (413667) | more than 4 years ago | (#31881488)

A joint comment by me and my dog Boog has just been filed on Slashdot.

Be honest. Your dog wrote the whole thing, didn't he?

RIAA v Boog : Illegal download of "How much is that doggy in the window?"
RIAA: Your honor, since defendant can't pay the 100 billion dollar value of this single download, we request Boog be put down.

There you have it: RIAA wants to kill your pets.

Ludicrous (1)

Anarki2004 (1652007) | more than 4 years ago | (#31881174)

**AA=association of America...How is this even vaguely American?

Re:Ludicrous (4, Insightful)

Shadow of Eternity (795165) | more than 4 years ago | (#31881190)

Simple, they bought it.

Re:Ludicrous (2, Insightful)

sznupi (719324) | more than 4 years ago | (#31881422)

They want to be free doing what they want, operating from "land of opportunity"?

Re:Ludicrous (4, Insightful)

boarder8925 (714555) | more than 4 years ago | (#31881502)

It's the American way to pay shittons of cash for the laws you want.

Eh, the typical (3, Insightful)

Megaweapon (25185) | more than 4 years ago | (#31881192)

1. Propose something to Congress so wacked out it would never ever pass
2. "Negotiate" it down to "semi-reasonable"
3. Pass legislation, GOTO 1

They won't get what they want this time, but something bad will still likely get whittled out from this.

Re:Eh, the typical (2, Insightful)

MasterPatricko (1414887) | more than 4 years ago | (#31881312)

Yup, they're just using the old tactic of pushing the comfort boundaries. This is what really worries me ... they'll "water this down" so that its "fair in comparison to the original proposal" after much debate, but in absolute terms it will still be ridiculous.

Re:Eh, the typical (4, Interesting)

ScrewMaster (602015) | more than 4 years ago | (#31881622)

Yup, they're just using the old tactic of pushing the comfort boundaries. This is what really worries me ... they'll "water this down" so that its "fair in comparison to the original proposal" after much debate, but in absolute terms it will still be ridiculous.

It will be interesting to see what happens if and when Congress attempts to mandate spyware on every single operating personal computer in the United States. And, I might add, not a program that reports to a legitimate law-enforcement agency (if any such Federal organizations exist in the present time), but to the private sector. If that does happen, the next question will be what penalties would be applied to an individual who attempts to circumvent, disable or uninstall said spyware. You know, like most of us on Slashdot. This puts a bad taste in my mouth, it really does, and anyone who claims, "hey, it's just entertainment" isn't seeing the bigger picture.

Besides, given the RIAA's demonstrated inability to reliably sue the right people, unwillingness to admit mistakes and offer redress (and absolute willingness to write off the collateral damage with out a second's thought) I have zero doubt that this would also be highly destructive, only more so. Remember folks, the MPAA is composed of people just as amoral and fundamentally dangerous as the RIAA crowd: hell, they're cut from precisely the same mold. Don't forget Jack "The VCR will DESTROY the industry!" Valenti ... there are plenty more where he came from.

Not the America I grew up in, let me tell you.

Re:Eh, the typical (2, Informative)

nurb432 (527695) | more than 4 years ago | (#31881390)

That's how we got the DMCA.. and most all other invasive laws.

Re:Eh, the typical (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31881414)

Hey, maybe those Tea party people could help. Couldn't you frame this as one more branch of the evil Obama administration's efforts to take our rights away? ...

Psshshshthahahahahahaha...heh... ...

*cry*

Re:Eh, the typical (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31881476)

Congress should be furious for 'being played' with such an obvious un-american proposal. They should reinstate the House Un-American Activities Committee as a response. Whatever bad reputation it had, it seems very appropriate here.

Re:Eh, the typical (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31881480)

Congrats. You've given the algorithm used for the last century to turn copyright into what it is today.

Re:Eh, the typical (2, Interesting)

CrazyDuke (529195) | more than 4 years ago | (#31881612)

Actually, I read a book on how to influence people that cited a study done on Watergate. And, it is a well known sales tactic, and is confirmed in social psychology texts. The implied conclusion of which is that the result does not even have to be "semi-reasonable" itself. The sales pitch (negotiation as you put it) just has to appear somewhat reasonable, not what is actually being sold. It just has to be less audacious, hence your quotes.

It seems people are hard coded to negotiate in good faith under the assumption that the other player is also acting similarly, even if evidence indicates otherwise. Thus, people will often reflexively entertain and agree to ridiculous arrangements based on the need to alleviate this external dissonance of sorts. Thus, a street peddler can sell you the $1 trinket necklace he just bought at a dollar store for $5 by asking for $8 first and then "compromising" to $5, despite the fact you wouldn't even have bought it for a buck otherwise. (FYI: That also includes an example of assumed high value for high cost and inadequately compensating for an initial impression.)

Dupe? (4, Informative)

Bearhouse (1034238) | more than 4 years ago | (#31881194)

Re:Dupe? (1)

Lord Lode (1290856) | more than 4 years ago | (#31881242)

No, the difference is that this time it's for real!

A sensible approach. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31881198)

They know it's not going to fly.

But, by asking for way too much, they're attempting to shift the frame of reference - anything they do manage to push through is going to seem reasonable by comparison.

Careful (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31881214)

You cant just make up batshit insane stuff that no human being would ever say and claim it came from MPAA and RIAA. I'm pretty sure there's a law about that.

Re:Careful (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31881258)

You cant just make up batshit insane stuff that no human being would ever say and claim it came from MPAA and RIAA. I'm pretty sure there's a law about that.

Corporations aren't human.

Re:Careful (5, Insightful)

Anarki2004 (1652007) | more than 4 years ago | (#31881286)

Correct. Corporations aren't human. But somebody thought it would be a great idea to give them the same rights as individuals.

Spend more time on your own problems! (2, Insightful)

adosch (1397357) | more than 4 years ago | (#31881240)

Yet another lost cause for MPAA and RIAA with failing to provide a legit and legal way on their own to produce and distribute digital content to the masses, so now you're going to hit up the government like every other 'Big Corporation' or 'Big Industry' has to help some failed quest.

Never once have I seen these two organizations do anything more than indictments, court battles and really lame 4 minute short films on why 'piracy of copyrighted material is bad'. Come up with a real solution. Software implementation will not even put a dent in this and it'll be worked around in 24 hours or less at best. More tax dollars at waste!

Why not just charge less? (4, Insightful)

mfnickster (182520) | more than 4 years ago | (#31881256)

RIAA, MPAA - why don't you just sell your product for a reasonable price so that more people will buy it? Make it easily downloadable and hassle-free (standard formats with no DRM).

Wouldn't that be easier than the technical and legislative shenanigans you seem so enamored of??

Re:Why not just charge less? (1)

east coast (590680) | more than 4 years ago | (#31881382)

RIAA, MPAA - why don't you just sell your product for a reasonable price so that more people will buy it?

What price beats free?

Re:Why not just charge less? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31881448)

KKK, NSDAP, RIAA and MPAA, apparently.

Re:Why not just charge less? (1)

Rockoon (1252108) | more than 4 years ago | (#31881596)

They can offer free low quality (say 64kbps) audio on demand for free, and then charge a small amount for 128kbps and a premium for 196+kbps.

oh wait.. they already offer 128kbps for free in the form of Pandora/etc, 'cept that its not on demand.

Re:Why not just charge less? (2, Insightful)

mfnickster (182520) | more than 4 years ago | (#31881614)

> What price beats free?

People will buy something if they get a perceived value, and the convenience saves them the trouble of going out and finding it. Witness iTunes Music Store.

If they feel they're being ripped off, they'll go out of their way to pirate it.

Re:Why not just charge less? (2, Interesting)

lostros (260405) | more than 4 years ago | (#31881656)

quite a few people buy books. libraries have been available for quite some time.

Re:Why not just charge less? (1)

sznupi (719324) | more than 4 years ago | (#31881466)

They don't want people buying more movies or music; they dream for return of times when people were buying only from them.

Re:Why not just charge less? (4, Insightful)

shadowbearer (554144) | more than 4 years ago | (#31881514)

  Because charging *less* would cut into their hooker and blow money. Duh.

SB

Re:Why not just charge less? (2, Interesting)

Culture20 (968837) | more than 4 years ago | (#31881616)

RIAA, MPAA - why don't you just sell your product for a reasonable price so that more people will buy it? Make it easily downloadable and hassle-free (standard formats with no DRM). Wouldn't that be easier than the technical and legislative shenanigans you seem so enamored of??

You seem to think they're after money. I think they have loftier aspirations. Who needs gold when you can order your subjects to do anything at sword-point?

box-office receipts futures market (4, Funny)

M. Baranczak (726671) | more than 4 years ago | (#31881274)

I'm really torn about this one. The movie industry hates it, but the finance industry likes it; which one is more evil?

Re:box-office receipts futures market (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31881528)

I'm really torn about this one. The movie industry hates it, but the finance industry likes it; which one is more evil?

Agree. Its a very close call. However, Im going to have to go with the Financial Services Industry being more evil. Although both Industries are designed with but one purpose in mind: redistributing resources (“money”) from the many to the few, the entertainment Industry at least gives the consumer a little value, movies & music, while it reaches into their pocket for money. The financial services industry is wholly parasitic and provides no value whatsoever to anyone who is not a member of the club. As to the futures, its really irrelevant and somewhat like two old time cartoon politicians fighting over which one gets to rip the lollipop out of the baby’s hand.

Also agree with the above poster as to the software, this is entirely a matter of framing. The entertainment industry knows it will not get this one through, but they want the end result to seem reasonable by comparison. Then they can appear at press conferences to explain that although the software that they do get approved for installation is draconian, they gave up so much from the position that would have been what was best for the industry.

Its been said so many times, the most recent I remember is from Gladiator: “they are the masses, show them magic and wonderment with one hand and you can do pretty much whatever you want to them with the other.” (paraphrased badly) As long as the masses continue to let the few who are inclined to manipulate them get away with doing it, they will continue to get bent over the barrel til the end of time.

What about Linux? (5, Insightful)

javacowboy (222023) | more than 4 years ago | (#31881276)

Well, if this happens, people who never before even considered running Linux will start installing it en masse on their PCs or Macs. People who never before would have made the effort to learn how to install it will become quite proficient at doing so.

I'm guessing nobody will bother writing such software for Linux. Even then, how do you ensure it's installed with every single distro? What are they going to do? Ban Linux? They'd have to either shut down or block every single site that offers a Linux ISO.

One way or another, this isn't going to fly.

Re:What about Linux? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31881354)

Wow, a Mac fanboi with pie in the sky dreams of Linux mass adoption. Will miracles never cease?

*cough* *cough*

Re:What about Linux? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31881410)

Wow, douchbaggery rears it's head.

Re:What about Linux? (4, Insightful)

Zumbs (1241138) | more than 4 years ago | (#31881394)

If it is illegal to have a home computer without the "anti-infringement" software, and such software does not exist for Linux, it will in practice become illegal to run Linux. A gray shade will be if the software will need to run, that is, will it be legal to dualboot with Windows/Mac (with the software) and Linux (without the software)? Either way, the requested law is a draconian invasion of privacy, as well as a backdoor into your system for anyone from malicious hackers, spies or blackmailers to use.

Re:What about Linux? (4, Funny)

WrongSizeGlass (838941) | more than 4 years ago | (#31881406)

Well, if this happens, people who never before even considered running Linux will start installing it en masse on their PCs or Macs. People who never before would have made the effort to learn how to install it will become quite proficient at doing so.

Um, would these be the same people who call me for help when their "e-mail is broken" because they accidentally sorted it by something other than 'Date'?

What are they going to do? Ban Linux? They'd have to either shut down or block every single site that offers a Linux ISO.

Let's not give them any more bad ideas, m'kay?

Re:What about Linux? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31881504)

These people are elitist kooks who still view the public purely as consumers -- they just don't get it. As if those members of the public who staff VFX houses (running linux) are a different class of social actor than any other member of the public running linux.

This isn't so much a pro-linux thing, merely that the public have access to OSX and final cut or to DAW software. Some members of the public even work in those industries which the MPAA/RIAA claim to represent. Nobody doing A/V work has CPU time to spare for spyware, so that is simply a non-starter.

The real issue here is that of approaching-zero marginal cost for digital goods. The old distribution monopolies and the cartels that maintained them are finished and regardless of bought legislation, market forces will win.

Re:What about Linux? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31881520)

Careful, now, they just might, indeed, ban Linux. After all, it's used by such "subversive rogue states" like North Korea, France, and the NSA.....oh, wait.....

but seriously, this kind of arrogant asshattery needs to be dealt with ASAFP.

I wonder if this kinda thing would fall under the auspices of the R.I.C.O. Act? Is there a lawyer in the house?

Re:What about Linux? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31881570)

I think the more scary thing is that most people just wouldn't care and wouldn't educate themselves enough to know what was in the MS monthly push.

"I'm not doing anything wrong, I have nothing to fear".

Re:What about Linux? (4, Informative)

Mornedhel (961946) | more than 4 years ago | (#31881588)

We're supposed to get one of those spywares any day now, over here in France, thanks to the HADOPI legislation.

When confronted with the problem of making people voluntarily run spyware on FOSS systems, Christine Albanel (ministry of Culture and Communication, proponent of HADOPI), said (my translation):

About software... about free software, of course free software, when you buy, of course, software, for instance the Microsoft pack (this is not free software): Word, Excel, Powerpoint, there are of course firewalls, I just said that, there is security software. But on free software there are also firewalls, which by the way, of course. For instance, we in the ministry, we have a piece of free software, called Open Office and there is indeed security software that prevents the Ministry of Culture to have access, obviously, and the free software editors release firewalls, and even release free [gratis] firewalls. So that argument has no grounds. That is what I wanted to say.

And that is basically the last we heard of it, and they moved on with the project. She said that in front of the entire Assemblée Nationale to the representative who had asked her if she had considered the problem of FOSS systems, including the half-dozen "évidemment" and the unfinished sentences.

Now what happens is that when accused of infringing copyrights, it's the HADOPI authority's word against yours, and despite this being -- supposedly -- a country where you are innocent until proved otherwise, for some reason the burden of proof rests with the infringer here. So your *only* way of demonstrating that you are not guilty is to be running the government-approved spyware, which you can't, because it's HADOPI-style multiplatform, which probably means you can run it on Windows Vista *and* Windows Seven.

Before anyone storms in declaring that's what France gets for being a socialist country and that socialism inevitably leads to governments spying on their citizens: our current government is right wing (on our spectrum), and the Parti Socialiste is against HADOPI.

To conclude, the most likely answer to your question ("What are they going to do? Ban Linux?") is "no, they're just going to pretend it does not exist, and when the time comes to explain why you are not running the spyware, good luck trying to convince them it's related to ethical questions".

"The Right to Read" (5, Insightful)

Mr. Slippery (47854) | more than 4 years ago | (#31881296)

Of course, if they want spyware on every computer, then you can no longer have control of your computer. Software development will have to be heavily regulated.

RMS saw it coming over a decade ago; go read his little parable The Right to Read [gnu.org] , if you don't know it already.

Futures market for b-o receipts: a derivative? (3, Funny)

John Hasler (414242) | more than 4 years ago | (#31881300)

Surely this is one of those evil, nasty derivatives that will soon be banned by financial regulation anyway. After all, everyone knows that speculators and derivatives caused the recession, right?

Stallman predicted it. (2, Interesting)

Stormwatch (703920) | more than 4 years ago | (#31881316)

The MAFIAA read this [gnu.org] and thought it was a good idea.

Insurance Broker's Association demands policeman (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31881332)

Insurance Broker's Association demands politicians to station a policeman in every home to make sure, that the household is not involved in theft or other crimes, causing gazillion dollars of demage each year for the insurance industry.

I would urge IATSE to strike against this (5, Interesting)

ev1lcanuck (718766) | more than 4 years ago | (#31881336)

Should these asinine ideas come closer to fruition I would urge the union of which I am a member: IATSE Local 700 Motion Picture Editors Guild to go on strike and encourage other IATSE unions to do the same. The ideas being proposed can and will harm our industry and our livelihood by creating distrust and distaste of the media in the general public. It is unacceptable to treat our customers as criminals.

If entertainment industry workers took a stand for the country as a whole then public opinion would be on our side. The producers would have to take us seriously.

Makes Me Think About Pirating (2, Interesting)

MacroSlopp (1662147) | more than 4 years ago | (#31881340)

I think that artists should be rewarded for their efforts and as such I buy all of my music; however, I now realize that this means I am ALSO supporting these thugs? Maybe i should reconsider my activities, because I DO NOT WANT TO SUPPORT THESE GUYS. What should I do?

Re:Makes Me Think About Pirating (1)

sznupi (719324) | more than 4 years ago | (#31881540)

Just don't listen to the music under the umbrella of RIAA members, simple.

Re:Makes Me Think About Pirating (1)

my $anity 0 (917519) | more than 4 years ago | (#31881604)

Try and find musicians that you like that don't make albums with RIAA labels.

If you want a place to look,Jamendo [jamendo.com] has some pretty awesome music, and it's all free, but you can buy extra stuff, and also send donations.

Re:Makes Me Think About Pirating (2, Insightful)

uffe_nordholm (1187961) | more than 4 years ago | (#31881670)

In your position I would pirate everything, and send a couple of bucks straight to the artist I like. And for the artists, it might very well mean _more_ money, since they only get peanuts per sold CD anyway... For the record companies, though, it will mean _less_ money. I am not sure that is a bad thing though ;-)

Exactly how? (5, Insightful)

headkase (533448) | more than 4 years ago | (#31881358)

Exactly how is this proverbial scanning software supposed to tell the difference between an illegal file and a legitimate one? Based on file name? Based on hash? Easily defeated and ineffective. The only way to truly tell if a file is infringing is to have a Turing complete artificial intelligence to watch it, listen to it, read it, or play it. Nothing short will do. Since websites hosting questionable content are having such difficulty separating out the files when forced to we can only conclude that Turing quality AI is not available yet. So, although the design specs call for a magic wand none are available.

Re:Exactly how? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31881458)

F*** that, it'll just search for all *.mp3 and *.ogg files, plus *.avi's over a gig in size, then filter for a half-dozen porn words and try to match file names.

Solution? Label all your files "19yo donkey punch gone wild bukkake shave" plus a reference number. Hey, I thought I saw that one on EMule the other day...

Re:Exactly how? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31881484)

You can fingerprint artifacts in a rip. Sorry that you're so behind the curve.

Re:Exactly how? (1)

Rockoon (1252108) | more than 4 years ago | (#31881628)

Ripping isnt illegal (yet) ..

...distribution is.

Re:Exactly how? (1)

John Hasler (414242) | more than 4 years ago | (#31881562)

> Exactly how is this proverbial scanning software supposed to tell the
> difference between an illegal file and a legitimate one? Based on file name?

That's easy. If it looks suspicious delete it. Better safe than sorry, right?

Re:Exactly how? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31881674)

Exactly how is this proverbial scanning software supposed to tell the difference between an illegal file and a legitimate one? Based on file name? Based on hash? Easily defeated and ineffective. The only way to truly tell if a file is infringing is to have a Turing complete artificial intelligence to watch it, listen to it, read it, or play it. Nothing short will do. Since websites hosting questionable content are having such difficulty separating out the files when forced to we can only conclude that Turing quality AI is not available yet. So, although the design specs call for a magic wand none are available.

Actually, there's an app for that [shazam.com]

Not only NO (2, Insightful)

shadowbearer (554144) | more than 4 years ago | (#31881442)

  But FUCK NO.

  Who the hell do they think they are? Arrogant bastards.

  You know what we need in this country? A presidential administration with the balls to dissolve the RIAA and MPAA and put their executives in prison, where they rightly belong. Any corporate executive who would sign off on an idiot statement like this badly needs a reality check.

SB

 

Re:Not only NO (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31881512)

Not going to happen. Change comes from the barrel of a gun, pure and simple. Remember - killing an evil man is a just act. Don't let anyone try to tell you that killing is always wrong. Sometimes it's the right thing to do.

Re:Not only NO (1)

John Hasler (414242) | more than 4 years ago | (#31881626)

So you want to have people imprisoned (not even tried and convicted: just locked up) for proposing legislation that you dislike.

I don't like the MPAA and the RIAA either (and I favor drastic reductions in the scope of copyright), but I think I prefer them to you.

Just don't play the game (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31881532)

Everyone could just stop buying the goods they represent. I haven't seen a Hollywood film in over a year (although honestly, its because they all suck), my tastes in music are stuck in the 80s, so I also don't my CDs anymore.

Re:Just don't play the game (1)

Stormwatch (703920) | more than 4 years ago | (#31881662)

so I also don't my CDs anymore.

It seems you have accidentally a verb.

When you tell someone... (1)

John Hasler (414242) | more than 4 years ago | (#31881536)

..."If you could have anything you want, what would you ask for?", what do you expect?

BTW if they want a pony too I have several for sale. That they might actually get.

They can request anything really. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31881594)

They can request anything they want, but will we, and our governments be stupid enough to listen to them?

Will we stop them?

They will probably request that every household be patrolled by a RIAA/MPAA policeman 24-7, as a live in form of copy protection / police.

It doesnt mean it will happen. But that means we should also stand up for ourselves or else we will not be represented in our governments decisions. Hammer the crap out of your representatives until they listen. Their children use torrents too.

On a side note: I've heard millionaires who work in entertainment openly admit they torrent DVD and Bluray and watch them in their $50,000 home theaters.

OK, but.. (2, Interesting)

hom3chuk (977560) | more than 4 years ago | (#31881620)

We want, on our side, "FBI notice"-cutting software, trailer-skipping software, "region-lock"-disabling software, "simple whistlersless menu and episode list" software to be installed on every single computer involved in movie industry and every DVD-player. OK?

What if their spyware won't run on my OS? (1)

schwit1 (797399) | more than 4 years ago | (#31881640)

Will we all have to run Windows? Wasn't their a court case a while back where the defendant's computer was required to be monitored as part of the sentence and he didn't use Windows.

What the big guys forgot (1)

prefec2 (875483) | more than 4 years ago | (#31881650)

We do not have the money to buy all these products, tools, licenses, objects, and services. We make them. We sell them. We provide them. But we do not have the money to buy them all. And that's why some things like music or movies or books or programs are used without paying. It is quite simple. We (as in the people in the world) have in percentage less money than the upper 10% or 5%. Most money is owned buy the big guys. And with most I mean around 80% (depends on the study can be up to 85%) of the money and resources belong to those guys. And in recent years (the last 2 decades) this difference got bigger. So in relation we have less, while they have more. This has nothing to do with envy. Not a bit. It is foremost a fact. As these are all official figures (use google if you do not believe me). And it is not a wonder that their share increases, because they got an average return of 6% while the economy growth is only 3% (worldwide). So there is a slight discrepancy and therefore they get richer and we become less and less of the share, but shall buy all the products and services. So in the end some of us, think copying music and movies and books and programs is not so bad.

Possble reason for dismissal? (1)

knarf (34928) | more than 4 years ago | (#31881652)

Reading the proposals by the MAFIAA [mafiaa.org] I can not help but notice that they keep on referring to the act of copyright infringement as 'copyright theft'. As far as I know copyright law does not deal with theft, it deals with infringement on the limited rights given to the copyright holder. Copyright theft sounds more like someone breaks into some fictional 'copyright register' and steals the actual copyrights, denying the original copyright holder of those rights in the future.

I can only assume that the actual laws which they buy are worded more correctly but if ever someone were to be sued for 'copyright theft' I assume this would be grounds for dismissal. After all, the copyrights can not be stolen if the copyright holder still has them and copyright law does not deal with stolen property.

I thought US was against gambling. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31881664)

So calling it a 'futures market' makes it all right. What could possibly go wrong?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?