Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

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!

Death By DMCA

Zonk posted more than 8 years ago | from the law-to-the-head-ed-grubberman dept.

414

Dino writes "There's a good article in the IEEE Spectrum, titled 'Death by DMCA', which talks about how whole classes of devices were eliminated, and how others won't even see the light of day as a result of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. One example is ReplayTV's TiVo-like devices which featured sharing capabilities, along with automatic ad skipping; the company was sued to bankruptcy, and the reincarnated device supported neither sharing nor ad skipping."

cancel ×

414 comments

none (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15467358)

first post

Oh... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15467359)

...is that what that screaming sound was.

more proof the RIAA/MPAA are insane (5, Insightful)

yagu (721525) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467363)

This is cool, I don't have to change my "subject" lines for posts any more... it's all about the entertainment industry's state of mental health.

From the article: "These new capabilities did not please Hollywood. Jamie Kellner, then CEO of Turner Broadcasting System Inc., called skipping commercials "theft" and, along with 28 entertainment companies including major movie studios and television networks--such as Disney, Paramount, Time Warner, Fox, Columbia, ABC, NBC, and CBS--sued ReplayTV for contributing to copyright infringement."

WTF? Skipping commercials is theft? FUCK YOU Jamie Kellner.... FUCK YOU TBS, FUCK YOU Disney, Paramount, Time Warner, Fox, Columbia, ABC, NBC and CBS! So, for those not using some sort of tivo-like device, if they should step out to relieve themselves, is THAT theft?

It galls that devices are being driven away from the marketplace because they're too good. And it equally galls that layer upon layer of obfuscation continues to be heaped on existing technology, to the point that when something works, my heart palpitates: is it the signal?, is it the unit?, or is the FUCKING DRM that I somehow forgot to set correctly?

Also from the article (referring to the ability to create "unencumbered digital tuners": "The entertainment companies do not like the flexibility of these home-built machines--or, more significant to them, the flexibility of the machines that consumer electronics manufacturers could offer under the current copyright law and its Betamax rule." WTF?, again?

They don't like the flexibility of these machines? I'm willing to bet somewhere in their ad campaigns they're bragging on some feature they're offering as flexible, etc. Gawd, I hate the industry.

So, technology continues to improve in quantum leaps, but the governor that is the RIAA/MPAA consortium does everything in their power to ensure technology is crippled to their whims, to enhance their power and profit.

Has anyone read Player Piano by Vonnegut? Great book... pretty good story about technology and designed obsolescence, and the collapse therein of a society... I won't give away the ending, it's worth reading.

</vent> Thanks, I feel better now.

Re:more proof the RIAA/MPAA are insane (2, Informative)

CrackedButter (646746) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467434)

Don't forget these innovations are only curbed in the US. The rest of the country outside the US can and will enjoy these technologies.

Non-U.S.'ers not safe either (5, Insightful)

KingSkippus (799657) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467767)

First of all, this was a damn good article, one of the most thoughtful and thorough ones I've read in a long, long time.

Second of all, non-U.S. citizens aren't safe. The RIAA and MPAA are pushing our government to force other countries to sign their digital freedoms away in trade agreements and treaties. The article specifically deals with this issue.

Remember, the guy who released deCSS was arrested for breaking no Norweigian law. The Pirate Bay guys have had their equipment seized for breaking no Swedish law. The point is that just as the U.S. flexes its military muscles in places like Iraq, it flexes its corporate muscles in countries such as the one that you call home, wherever that may be. And as weird and hard as it may be to believe, I'm 100% sure that the government in your country is just as capable of doing the same really boneheaded stupid things that the U.S. government has done given the right (*ahem*) incentives.

So no, this is not a problem unique to the United States. Yes, the U.S. may be the worst of the lot, and yes, a lot of this foolishness has arisen primarily because of corrupt greedy U.S. organizations who don't give a flip about consumers there or anywhere else, but if you believe nothing else, believe this: This idiocy will reach you in your supposedly safe and comfortable home country unless you are vigilant and active about stopping it.

Re:more proof the RIAA/MPAA are insane (3, Insightful)

Thing 1 (178996) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467837)

Emphasis added:

The rest of the country outside the US can and will enjoy these technologies.

Mr. President, the correct term is "empire." 1/2 :)

Re:more proof the RIAA/MPAA are insane (3, Insightful)

Corbets (169101) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467445)

Well, your post was passionate, I'll give you that.

However, I'd like to ask a simple question. If the networks can no longer count on people watching at least some ads, how are they to pay for content? The day most people have "auto-commercial-skip" is the day advertisers stop paying to be a part of the program. At that point, the networks would have to charge the consumers directly. Are you interested in paying even more for cable TV then?

I'm not saying it's theft or agreeing with any of the other comments made by those companies, but you need to put down emotion and maybe start coming up with reasonable alternative business models if you want to see devices like this suceed. Of course, once those business models are in use, there won't be any need for devices like this... so it's kind of pointless.

I don't know what the answer is, but venting on Slash about the end of society isn't any way to bring it about.

Re:more proof the RIAA/MPAA are insane (5, Interesting)

kaiser423 (828989) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467514)

I would say that the networks should really start looking into it -- in about 20 years all the politicians are going to be people who lived through the shutdown of napster, the lawsuits, and the general stupidity.

I'd say that there's plenty of room for other means of revenue. Product placement in show, micropayments, paying to download the show ala iTunes, not giving their actors a million a show, dvd sales of the series, etc. There are lots of revenue streams that the station currently makes money on; they just need to enhance a couple and stop spending so extravagantly and they'll be just fine.

We need to stop worrying about them, and they need to start worrying about other content usurping their marketplace. In the future, their actors will likely be paid less and they will likely make less money. But that's a direct result of us having more to occupy our free time. That's business, and they need to plan for it, not try to legislate it out of existence. But so far, they're winning with the legislation so they're going to keep pushing it.


Actually, the legislation is a very bold move to prevent other content from usurping their marketshare, and what we're reading on slashdot is the natural backlash to their effots. They've made their decision, and are going to try to execute their gameplan regardless of criticism because billions are at stake here. We need to vote with our votes, because nothing else will work. They have way too much money and influence currently to vote with our wallet or our voices. They're going after the legislators, and so far they're winning them over.

Re:more proof the RIAA/MPAA are insane (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15467528)

We already pay for the content by subscriptions, why would we pay for it twice through their advertising scam?

Re:more proof the RIAA/MPAA are insane (1)

castoridae (453809) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467568)

How about OTA broadcasts? Or (I realize this is straying a bit), how about TiVo for AM/FM radio (not subscription XM)? How do these companies continue to pay for their content and broadcast since they don't receive cable fees for your view?

Also, I'm curious what the breakdown for cable service really looks like. I'd bet a fair amount of it goes to "distribution" by the cable company - i.e. Comcast - and very little to the networks or production houses that actually make the content. Anyone know?

You are fooling only yourself. (1)

Halvy (748070) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467535)


I don't know what the answer is, but venting on Slash about the end of society isn't any way to bring it about.

Ohh, like people are going to learn about this very serious problem, which cannot be talked about enough, by watching cable news?!

Motivating people to increase their use of P2P and making even more copies of 'legit' dvd/cd's is a wonderful thing.

I suppose you think you are slick, but I have news for you, you are the only one here who probably thinks so.

-- My favorite thing about OSS, is it's militancy!

Re:You are fooling only yourself. (1)

Corbets (169101) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467586)

you are the only one here who probably thinks so.

I'll grant you that!

Re:more proof the RIAA/MPAA are insane (4, Insightful)

Stellian (673475) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467540)

If the networks can no longer count on people watching at least some ads, how are they to pay for content? The day most people have "auto-commercial-skip" is the day advertisers stop paying to be a part of the program.


I guess that's the broadcasters problem, not mine. They should adapt their business model around this. Maybe air shorter, more interesting and targeted commercials, that people want to watch. I am willing to fill a questionnaire to help them select the best commercials for me. I don't know and I don't care how they would pay for content.
However, what they should not be allowed to do, is telling me what I can do with my TV and my video recorder, in my house.

Re:more proof the RIAA/MPAA are insane (4, Interesting)

richdun (672214) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467554)

You make a good point, except for this - if this were really the networks' issue, they should have sued Frito-Lay and Pepsi decades ago. I skip commercials all the time, and I don't have a Tivo or other DVR. People have been skipping commercials for years - mostly to go get whatever the commercial is selling out of the fridge. And if advertisers really though people were going to skip their commercials too much, they should have went after whoever it was that release the first remote control. Even if I'm not hungry, I'm not watching commercials if the remote is within reach. I don't see many complaints from the actual advertisers (maybe because its Slashdot and we don't care if Pepsi complains about us not watching their commercials while we IV in Mountain Dew during any and all coding projects, or mostly because they've been using multiple business models in their advertising for years under blanket marketing strategies), just the networks themselves.

Re:more proof the RIAA/MPAA are insane (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15467771)

if this were really the networks' issue, they should have sued Frito-Lay and Pepsi decades ago ...I skip commercials all the time, and I don't have a Tivo or other DVR. People have been skipping commercials for years - mostly to go get whatever the commercial is selling out of the fridge.

Obviously you're not skipping them all - their commercials have worked and you are buying their crap. They couldn't be happier.

Re:more proof the RIAA/MPAA are insane (5, Insightful)

masklinn (823351) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467558)

However, I'd like to ask a simple question. If the networks can no longer count on people watching at least some ads, how are they to pay for content?

How about "that's their fucking problem not mine"?

Pro-capitalism, pro-"free trade", pro-whatever-you-think-that-is americans (I'm not american btw) usually point out that the market sorts itself out, how about letting it sort itself out for once?

They could switch to 100% pay-per-view, or a single "free" channel and some for-pay channels, or they could die altogether for all i'd care, but the fact that their current business model would be fucked is not a good enough reason for me nor for anyone else to accept that kind of crap.

How are they to pay for content? I don't give a fuck, seriously. It's their job to figure it out but it's not their job to make it impossible for me to get devices I'm interrested in.

Progress always win in the end, while they can delay the widespread use of TiVo-like devices they can't slaughter it altogether, they're merely getting some more time.

I'm not saying it's theft or agreeing with any of the other comments made by those companies, but you need to put down emotion and maybe start coming up with reasonable alternative business models if you want to see devices like this suceed.

Of course not, I don't need to come up with "reasonable alternative business models", nor does the GP, I'm not a content provider or anything, it's not my job. If they can't come up with alternative business models by themselves then they're better off dead, and the sooner the better, other more intelligent guys will think of something and take their place in no time.

Re:more proof the RIAA/MPAA are insane (5, Insightful)

Corbets (169101) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467655)

Actually, the use of non-market strategies (i.e. legislative means) is very common in business. Businesses do it all the time. If you want that to change, time to work on your politicians!

How about "that's their fucking problem not mine"?

Sure is, and they're trying to solve it. Look at it this way - for the people working in those companies, it is their job to get you to watch TV and more specifically watch those ads. They will pursue all means that they think are ethical/legal and probably some that they don't. But it's their job, and you can hardly blame them for doing it any more than they can blame you for flipping burgers at the local Mickey Ds (or whatever your country has - but I live in Switzerland at the moment, and even these guys have the golden arches). Obviously they haven't yet come up with better ideas. When they do, they'll get implemented, and given the quality of technical skill some Slashdotters have, there's even a chance that the solution could come from here.

We're getting back to copyright issue, I think - it's their content, according to current copyright law, and they think they grant you a very specific use - to watch it on your TV. You, on the other hand, think that once they broadcast the content to you, it's yours to do with as you please. In this case, the law would appear to disagree with you. Until and unless a majority of people within the US share your view, which will not happen until you can share it without cussing and sounding like a fool, then US law will continue to protect the interests of those TV networks. Unbridled anger rarely serves effective change.

Sure is nice to see one of my posts stir up so many comments, though. ;-)

Well that's the issue, isn't it? (1)

FatSean (18753) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467671)

People don't realize what they are missing, perhaps we should advertise to the world all the cool things they COULD be doing...but won't be able to because the Media companies have bought the politicians?

Re:more proof the RIAA/MPAA are insane (2, Insightful)

masklinn (823351) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467685)

Sure is, and they're trying to solve it.

Trying to stall something has never been a solution has never been a solution, and couldn't ever be called one.

it is their job to get you to watch TV and more specifically watch those ads

Works wonder since I don't own a TV anymore.

Obviously they haven't yet come up with better ideas

Point is that they're not even trying to, the only thing they're trying to do is to keep the current statu-quo.

Re:more proof the RIAA/MPAA are insane (1)

Corbets (169101) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467674)

Sorry, missed the obvious in my last comment.

If you're not an American, how does this bother you? Aren't companies in your country allowed to produce such a device? Then let 'em go at it! If not, then don't be dissing my country for the same flaws you guys have!

Re:more proof the RIAA/MPAA are insane (1)

JanneM (7445) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467607)

However, I'd like to ask a simple question. If the networks can no longer count on people watching at least some ads, how are they to pay for content? The day most people have "auto-commercial-skip" is the day advertisers stop paying to be a part of the program. At that point, the networks would have to charge the consumers directly. Are you interested in paying even more for cable TV then?

If (1) the networks need people to watch the ads to sell ad space to pay for content; and (2) people no longer watch ads, whether it be because of Tivo-like devices or just because of better measurement of normal behaviour; then (3) the networks are working under a dysfunctional business model.

So the networks need to find a business model that allows them to pull in enough ad money to cover the cost of creating an audience to sell (ie. create programming that people want to watch). If the ad rates drop, the networks need to figure out how to make the cost of an audience lower (more cheap reality programming; focusing more on only the most desireable demographics), make the audience underwrite part of the cost like the cable networks already do, or scale back wholesale.

And yes, it may very well mean that some forms of TV programming is no longer viable at all; nobody is prepared to underwrite the cost anymore. For instance, I can easily imagine news disappearing altogether from TV, with newspapers providing both the in-depth analysis (that there is never room for on TV) and the breaking news online, as it happens, with moving pictures for subscribers.

Bottom line is, ther is nothing certain about the US network TV system surviving. As a matter of fact, few other markets seem to have ever developed a similar system in the first place, which should tell you something about its robustness.

Re:more proof the RIAA/MPAA are insane (5, Insightful)

jthill (303417) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467619)

venting on Slash about the end of society
Who'd-a-thunk anybody could strawman that post?

Have you never once wondered why almost no one objects to Google's ubiquitous ads?

Perhaps you think it's because they bribe us with all those cool toys. I thought about that. I don't believe it.

I think it's because they offer the ads. They're easy to ignore.

You can skip right over them without even noticing.

But, say the networks, if they can't shove ads in your face for twenty minutes an hour, and sue you for ignoring them, they'll go broke? They're running ads for companies that can't sell their product without bludgeoning people into insensibility. "Revolutionary new garden tool!!!! Makes a great gift!!!!". Christ, buddy, they're trying to sue us for not watching spam.

Re:more proof the RIAA/MPAA are insane (2)

kfg (145172) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467662)

If the networks can no longer count on people watching at least some ads, how are they to pay for content? The day most people have "auto-commercial-skip" is the day advertisers stop paying to be a part of the program.

I have a friend who inteneded to do a Master's thesis on television advertising. She had to abondon it. It turns out she could not watch television advertising, even when she wanted to, because her brain had been trained to auto-skip them.

She is an extreme example, but we all mentally (or even physically) auto-skip advertising to one extent or another and the advertising industry is already painfully aware that most of their effort has no effect.

You cannot create effective advertising by force.

. . .you need to put down emotion and maybe start coming up with reasonable alternative business models . . .

If he is not in the industry that is not his responsibility.

. . .if you want to see devices like this suceed.

Then don't pass new and oppressive laws banning them for no reason other than supporting a business model which has no place in codified law.

KFG

Re:more proof the RIAA/MPAA are insane (1)

hackwrench (573697) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467827)

I don't know what the answer is, but venting on Slash about the end of society isn't any way to bring it about.

No, but it is part of the process to fully suss the situation out so we can consolidate upon what the answer is.

Re:more proof the RIAA/MPAA are insane (1)

Beryllium Sphere(tm) (193358) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467832)

>If the networks can no longer count on people watching at least some ads, how are they to pay for content?

There's product placement, or making the commercials entertaining, but that's not the real answer.

The real answer to how they can make money is "the same way as the buggy whip makers". The world does not owe them a living. Especially the world does not owe them a living made possible by outlawing useful gadgets.

Re:more proof the RIAA/MPAA are insane (4, Insightful)

Znork (31774) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467834)

"If the networks can no longer count on people watching at least some ads, how are they to pay for content?"

Technological advances have cut costs across the whole industry, yet the monopoly protected businesses costs go on rising all the time. Have you considered the possibility that, in fact, the content is expensive because it's protected, not the other way around?

Opensource has shown us software can be produced at a fraction of the cost. Music has been freely produced for centuries. We're seeing more and more freely produced approaching quality pictures.

Maybe the networks dont have to charge consumers, maybe the producers need to damn well cut their coke habits down a notch.

"Are you interested in paying even more for cable TV then?"

Are you? Every serious analysis of the pricing shows that more protection equals _higher_ pricing. The day you're locked into a clockwork orange type setup in front of the TV, you can be damn sure the commercial break isnt ending. Ever.

Almost every other economic sector has to play by free market rules; it's time for the IP sectors to do the same.

Re:more proof the RIAA/MPAA are insane (2, Insightful)

nbritton (823086) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467456)

I tought the whole point of paying for cable was so you did not have to have/watch commercials?

Re:more proof the RIAA/MPAA are insane (1)

cyber-vandal (148830) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467524)

Tell me you're not serious. Cable is the most ad-saturated TV you can get, it's terrible.

Re:more proof the RIAA/MPAA are insane (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15467624)

I've heard stories about how there once was a time, long, long ago, when this was one of the points of subscribing to cable TV service. Sadly almost no one remembers.

Re:more proof the RIAA/MPAA are insane (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15467811)

Yeah, a long time ago, the only cable network was HBO, and it was advert-free. And it still is.

Every other early cable network (TBS, WGN, etc) had ads. "Nobody remembers" because it was never true.

Re:more proof the RIAA/MPAA are insane (1)

Knuckles (8964) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467518)

So, for those not using some sort of tivo-like device, if they should step out to relieve themselves, is THAT theft?

Sorry, but this is old news. Jamie Kellner has said previously [slashdot.org] , that there is only "a certain amount of tolerance" for peeing.
When asked if he considers people who go to the bathroom during a commercial to be thieves, he responded: "I guess there's a certain amount of tolerance for going to the bathroom. But if you formalize it and you create a device that skips certain second increments, you've got that only for one reason, unless you go to the bathroom for 30 seconds. They've done that just to make it easy for someone to skip a commercial."

Re:more proof the RIAA/MPAA are insane (2, Funny)

Mikya (901578) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467530)

Has anyone read Player Piano by Vonnegut? Great book... pretty good story about technology and designed obsolescence, and the collapse therein of a society... I won't give away the ending,

I think you just did.

Re:more proof the RIAA/MPAA are insane (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15467749)

Two points.

Are not the copyright companies stealing from the populus on a far greater scale with these attacks on fair use, new devices and technology as well as their ever increasing copyright perieods?

Also If you ask me the world needs widespread automatic addskipping: 1st the drivil on TV would dry up or adds would become worth watching (more than the drivil anyway). 2nd perhaps a better distributions method will be set up where people pay for the TV programs they want to watch... That way shows like Star Trek (not that I could stand to watched it, though a few that I saw were good) and Firefly wouldn't have had to be cancelled; instead if they were bad tbey would aquire less money and have to resort to old Star Trek style special effects and better scripts and plot focused at their core audience :P. Of course it would probably be rather expensive for the huge productions but who said that was necessary to tell a good story?

My anonymous two cents.

Uh... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15467364)

1998 [wikipedia.org] called and they want their post back.

Ad skipping is still there... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15467368)

... there's no more "commercial advance" button, and no more automatic commercial skipping, but you can press the right or left arrow to jump to the next commercial boundary. For more than commercials, it also comes in handy when you don't want to watch a particular story on 60 minutes.

Seriously... (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15467369)

...when is somebody going to call the RIAA and MPAA out on RICO charges?

Either that, or disband them by force - let them be first against the wall when the revolution comes!

Re:Seriously... (1)

WilliamSChips (793741) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467616)

Interestingly, a copy of the Encyclopedia Brittanica from the future said "The RIAA and MPAA were a bunch of clueless jerks who were the first against the wall when the revolution came."

Re:Seriously... (1)

MrSquirrel (976630) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467840)

The **AA are... I can't even think of a word bad enough to describe them. They don't benefit the artists and they fuck over the consumer. This sums them up pretty well: http://www.nata2.info/?path=humor%2Fpictures&img=r iaa.jpg [nata2.info]

When the masses awaken, corporations will listen (5, Interesting)

Mr. Samuel (950418) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467381)

Crap like this is part of the reason why I avoid television altogether.

For the moment, DRM and all of its related ridiculousness is the concern of geeks. We're the ones who are informed about the problems with DRM and the slippery slope that it's sent us down.

If things continue to get worse (and there's no reason to believe they won't), it will get to the point where the general public will no longer line XYZ Company's pockets. And when you hit the bottom line, you suddenly start speaking that company's language.

Re:When the masses awaken, corporations will liste (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15467585)

Stop buying? Are you kidding me? There's millions of people out there who love to be fed shit through TV and to whom "DRM" sounds like Greek. They'll keep giving cash to the corporations as long as there's a demagogue convincing them that it's for their own good. Things don't change that way.

There's this town not far from where I live where a lot of real estate companies want to ruin the coastline with those fucking semi-detached houses, and the town's right-wing council wanted to approve a new land use plan to allow them to do so. Two days ago, a mob of angry locals -infuriated because of the council's disregard for their wishes- assaulted the town hall in true pitchfork-and-torch style (forcing the councilors and mayor to escape) and burnt said land use plan.

BTW, the previous mayor and councilors, who didn't approve of this land use planning, were extorted and received death threats. The real-estate mafia is quite a reality here in Spain.

Pitchforks and torches are the way to enlightenment, my friend.

Re:When the masses awaken, corporations will liste (1)

wheany (460585) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467679)

That sounds interesting, do you hava a link to a story?

Re:When the masses awaken, corporations will liste (1)

damsa (840364) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467604)

OTA Television is not encrypted, so there is no reason to avoid television because of DMCA, yet. Also regular people know about DRM, they don't know what its called though, they know they can't play certain mp3s as ringtones on their cell phones, or why they can't use their Apple iTunes songs on their Samsung mp3 players.

Re:When the masses awaken, corporations will liste (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15467626)

Crap like this is part of the reason why I avoid television altogether.


So many people repeat this theme. What's preventing to get rid of the TV altogether? I did that two years ago, and never looked back.

The only way to fight the DMCA (2, Insightful)

shifty_cow (977583) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467394)

is to actually involve yourself politically. If you just sit there and do nothing, the government/industry/lawyers will continue to infringe on your rights. Stop complaining in forums when stuff like this happens; VOTE or WRITE LETTERS or ORGANIZE A PROTEST *before* it happens and help ensure laws like this don't get passed.

Otherwise, this article reads just like any other rant on the DMCA. Honestly, why can't anyone think beyond "all your stuff should be free!" mentality. It won't work. Music is a bussiness. It will always be a bussiness. Same with movies. And software. Stop bitching when idustry chooses to fight technology rather than embrace it. Organize, make contacts in industry, lobby, tell everyone you know, VOTE! And remember:
Flaming != helping.
Flaming == counter-productive. Always.

Re:The only way to fight the DMCA (1)

Ulrich Hobelmann (861309) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467555)

Dunno why this is rated redundant... insensitive clods.

Well, I just wanted to say that flaming does help - it informs people about the issues, and that something is NOT normal and ok in the state of whatever.

Ok, screaming and hissing isn't really helpful though.

Smuggling opportunities (2, Insightful)

Harmonious Botch (921977) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467395)

I forget the exact quote - and the author - but someone once said that for every law that is passed there is a new business opportunity created in the black market. Fortunately, I'm close to Mexico. Place your orders here.

Re:Smuggling opportunities (1)

kfg (145172) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467737)

The obverse is also true. For every law that is repealed new, legal business opportunities open up.

But the old businesses might squeal like stuck pigs about it.

KFG

It was never about piracy (5, Informative)

RatBastard (949) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467396)

It was never about piracy. Domestic/consumer level piracy is so minor as to not make a difference in their bottom line. The real media pirates are the overseas DVD pressing plants that press legal DVDs by day and bootleg DVDs by night.

This is about controlling what you watch and how you watch it. It's about protecting their advertising revenue. It' about making you buy a new copy of your favorite content every time they change formats.

here's the proof that they're evil (5, Informative)

kaiser423 (828989) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467404)

The most tell-tale part:

In 2003, 321 Studios, of St. Charles, Mo., launched a software product called DVD X Copy for these more typical DVD owners. The company built in aggressive measures to prevent piracy, including an antipiracy splash screen that appeared when viewing any copy and watermarks that would enable copies to be traced back to those who made them. The management at 321 Studios hoped that these cooperative measures would stave off Hollywood's wrath.

The company was wrong. Before the DMCA, 321 Studios would have been on relatively safe legal ground. From the time of the Betamax case, U.S. courts had made it clear that copying devices were legal so long as they had any substantial lawful use. But the DMCA changed the rules. When the movie studios sued 321 Studios, the Hollywood contingent did not argue that any of their movies had been unlawfully copied. Instead, it said that the product circumvented a "technical protection measure," which in this case was the Content Scramble System (CSS) on DVDs.

The CSS is the scheme Hollywood uses to encrypt movies on DVDs. Decryption requires a key, which manufacturers of DVD players obtain by signing a license with the DVD Copy Control Association, a consortium of movie studios, including Fox and Warner, and technology providers, such as Intel and Toshiba. This license, in turn, forbids licensed devices from making digital copies of DVD content or from offering playback modes that the studios disapprove of. (DVD recorders can copy only unencrypted digital material, such as home movies.) The licensing rules and DMCA put companies like 321 Studios in a quandary. If they signed the license in order to obtain the CSS decryption keys, the document prohibited them from using those keys in software capable of copying a DVD. If they didn't sign the license and forged ahead anyway, deriving the CSS keys on their own, they risked prosecution or a civil suit under the DMCA for circumventing the CSS. After consideration, 321 Studios opted to go forward without a license. The DMCA quickly washed away DVD X Copy. After the movie studios prevailed in court in 2004, manufacturers pulled DVD X Copy and similar ripping tools off the U.S. market.

Re:here's the proof that they're evil (1)

geoff lane (93738) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467635)

CSS can barely be called encryption. The playback unit has the key hidden away in the firmware. It was security through obscurity and guess what? A screw up allowed a trivial hack to obtain the key and the entire CSS scheme was made useless (it was useless anyway as if you have the resources of a DVD pressing plant you don't need to decrypt a DVD to duplicate it.)


CSS cannot be fixed but its replacement proposed for the new formats has an update mechanism whereby your player can have it's firmware updated just by playing a disk. Sony must love that particular scheme...

Re:here's the proof that they're evil (1)

RobertLTux (260313) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467804)

and heres the funny part
if you add the PLF sources to your Mandriva source list (required to play dvds) then you will also have some very interesting programs also availible to you.

If they had just given us (*nix folks) a black code chunk to do the decryption then DeCSS would not have been needed (did you know that there is a public court filing that has the complete code to DeCSS?).

I would think that most distros have a "grayish" source for the needed bits

This is why DRM will work (4, Interesting)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467406)

By eliminating free trade.

Given the choice, the customer would buy the "better" product. The "better" product, for the customer, would of course be the one that offers him more liberty.

Now, devices that do that will vanish from the market because their companies are sued into oblivion. Result: Only crap can survive.

The customer is left out of the loop, as the deciding mechanism which items should survive on the market, which is actually his responsibility and role in a free market.

Free trade is dead. Welcome to the world of ... well, what exactly? In Communism, The Party decided what's good for you. What do you call a market where the producer, and him alone, dictates what you can and may buy?

It's called (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15467506)

It's called Fascism.

Re:It's called (2, Insightful)

moranar (632206) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467533)

Nope, it's called more properly Corporatism [wikipedia.org] .

Re:This is why DRM will work (1)

masklinn (823351) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467602)

Free trade is dead. Welcome to the world of ... well, what exactly? In Communism, The Party decided what's good for you. What do you call a market where the producer, and him alone, dictates what you can and may buy?

Well, it would usually be a plutocracy, but luckyly for us we now have a much better term to call it: a corporatocracy [wikipedia.org] where laws are made by and for corps (yeah, it is a neologism and you won't find it in your dictionary). Corps being owned by the richests, it boils down to plutocracy in the end, but I feel that corporatocracy much better describes what the USA have turned into.

in before the "just dont buy it" straw man.. (1)

plasmacutter (901737) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467739)

why "just not buying" cannot correct DRM [boingboing.net]

modern DRM is a result of large scale collusion and/or caving by electronics manufacturers, standards groups, hollywood, the FCC, and many other private parties.

who do you boycott? all of them? well then be prepared to live in a cave, eat by candle light, and hunt for food again.

Well, they might stop companies... (2, Insightful)

zappepcs (820751) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467407)

but they can never stop people building their own, nor can they stop people from 'loaning' their CD/DVD/Whatever to their friends. The 'sneakernet P2P' service.

All the *AA will ever manage to do is drive the sharing and fair use into a dark underground where they can never be able to find it without spending all of the money they do make. At that point, they will have to blame the loss of sales on their own crappy content, and their insane business practice of financially murdering any company that stood even half a chance of helping them find the 21st century.

Yep, so by all means, lets all work together to help the *AA find the real world, and do all our sharing underground, off the net, so they have only themselves to blame. Who knows, it might work..... NOT

Can't we just shoot them now?

Seriously, this is just one more reason to have them outlawed for monopolistic and draconian business practices. I personally don't see anything wrong with making *AA groups illegal... If enough of us vote, well, you never know...

Re:Well, they might stop companies... (1)

Tablizer (95088) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467478)

but they can never stop people building their own....
All the *AA will ever manage to do is drive the sharing and fair use into a dark underground where they can never be able to find it without spending all of the money they do make.


Yes, but who wants to be hunted all the time by Blade Runner-like suits because they let Aunt Bertha upload soap operas from Aunt Joan?

Re:Making *AA groups illegal... (1)

hackwrench (573697) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467489)

If we can somehow goad them into engaging in clearly racketeering activities, we may be able to get them to do that to themselves. They way they act currently it doesn't seem like it would be that hard, though I'm not good at that area of things and the apparent ease may be due to my lack of ability.

Proof we are not a democracy (5, Insightful)

Tablizer (95088) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467411)

This is yet more evidence that we are not a democracy. These bans and discouragements are almost entirely the result of lobbying backed by big inc's with deep pockets. No citizen majority voted for these. "Silly company, voting is only for humans".

Re:Proof we are not a democracy (1)

RatBastard (949) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467446)

It's proof that our government is for sale is what it is.

Which is pretty much the same thing as what you said.

Re:Proof we are not a democracy (3, Funny)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467487)

Well, if everyone here chips in, maybe we can buy our very own Senator?

Re:Proof we are not a democracy (1)

MarkByers (770551) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467578)

In a democracy, the government decides everything. The people only have the power to change the government, but they cannot tell them what to do or what not to do.

Democracy is the problem. Your vote is useless because everyone else ends up voting for the person out of two they hate the least. Elections are won based on what the general public thinks of the opposition. Real issues are lost behind a cloud of misdirection from both sides. Plus the media, who are being fed lots of money, are feeding the public with propaganda which alters the way they will vote.

Voting for change is an incremental process. Each 4 years or so you get to choose one issue to vote on. If you are lucky, one of the two candidates that have a chance of winning actually agree with your point of view. Otherwise you are screwed.

And you have no way to vote for your second most important issue. You must wait another 4 years to vote on that. So you *can* make a small change if you win, one whatever issue you think is most important.

And for every one thing you improve by voting, the government you voted for can make another 37 things worse. And you can't complain because you voted for it. And if they screw up the thing you voted for, they don't care. They will just distract you with a war or something.

But what's better than democracy? A benevolent dictator would be cool, but they are pretty rare... imagine how hard it would be not to be corrupted by the RIAA/MPAA. You probably think it's easy, but imagine what it would be like if you were in that situation. Almost any real person would give in and take the cash eventually.

Maybe it's best to keep it the way, and fight to take our rights back whenever we get the chance. Any better suggestions?

Re:Proof we are not a democracy (2, Insightful)

Tablizer (95088) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467634)

Voting for change is an incremental process. Each 4 years or so you get to choose one issue to vote on. If you are lucky, one of the two candidates that have a chance of winning actually agree with your point of view. Otherwise you are screwed.

Some States have issue-based ballots where you vote on specific issues. The feds could copy this model.

imagine how hard it would be not to be corrupted by the RIAA/MPAA.

Right now it is *legal* for organizations like the **AA to give campaign donations. Perhaps that should change. Free-speach laws prevent stopping issue-based advertizing on their part, but it should be possible to ban direct contributions to political candidates and perks such as luncheons. Politicians don't need cushy perks. There are plenty of candidates that will be happy to take the position, yet brown-bag their lunch.
             

Re:Proof we are not a democracy (1)

jthill (303417) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467760)

Your vote is useless because everyone else ends up voting for the person out of two they hate the least.
Clinton nominated a woman for AAG who proposed ways to fix that [wustl.edu] .

It's difficult to exaggerate the response her ideas provoked in the Republican Party.

Re:Proof we are not a democracy (1)

Keeper (56691) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467802)

In a democracy, the government decides everything. The people only have the power to change the government, but they cannot tell them what to do or what not to do.

You need to retake a high school civics class. In a democracy, the people vote on everything. The US government isn't a democracy, it's a democratic republic. It means the people elects representatives, and those representatives decide everything.

A democratic republic is supposed to help avoid the tryanny of the majority -- a situation where the majority of the people act in their best intrest to the detriment of the minority.

Proof we are not capitalist (5, Insightful)

ZachPruckowski (918562) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467670)

I'm not an economics major, but all the capitalists I've ever talked to seem to love the whole idea of "the market will solve". It's sort of their silver bullet to any arguement. So why don't we let the market solve? Capitalism is supposed to be dynamic. Companies have to accept changing roles and adapt to them, not fight them. Big companies have to be forced to accept that sometimes they "have to roll the hard 6" and take risks. There should be no corporate entitlement. No company is guaranteed to make money. That's what pisses me off about the RIAA and MPAA. They refuse to consider changing themselves to the world, they'd rather change the world to suit themselves. Granted, that might mean the end to $300 million production value blockbusters or fewer 1 hit wonders and more solid bands, but the world will cope, and the market can decide which model they like better.

Re:Proof we are not capitalist (2, Interesting)

Tablizer (95088) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467822)

Under "pure" capitalism one could make DVR's that can copy and network up the wazoo. The court system would not be part of it. Plus, who says we *should* have pure capitalism? We are supposed to be a democracy, and voters GRANT companies the privilage to conduct trade. In the old days, local governments had much more control over companies. Big companies have since bought themselves more power over the years with little or no direct approval by voters. Large companies like Monsanto and Intel have way too much political power.

Re:Proof we are not a democracy (1)

Keeper (56691) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467793)

Of course we're not a democracy. We're a democratic republic.

GeekPAC (4, Interesting)

Tablizer (95088) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467449)

I keep saying we need to form GeekPAC, a so-called Political Action Committee (AKA "trade organization") to help counter the big lobbying from deep-pocket companies. Geekpac would also promote open source, reduce software patents, and make companies scientifically justify "shortage" before importing more H-1B's. If we don't protect our political ass, nobody will.

already done (1)

svallarian (43156) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467658)

already done

Now get your ass over there and donate!

Re:GeekPAC (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15467665)

I could do one better...Let's just kill all of the lobbyists on the other side...much cheeper and a lot more fun.

Wait...screw that idea...lets just have a mass uprising and chop the top off of the *AA.

Oh, oh, even better...terrorists: here is your new mission. Destroy the *AA. Bomb their towers, murder the executives, have fun! That way there will be no more media in the US and then they will all go into mass histeria! It is perfect!

***Maybe I play to many violent video games***

There Are Ways Around It Already (1)

Halvy (748070) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467458)


As there will continue to be.

MAFIARIAA's are slowely digging their graves, as people will always figure out ways to get what they want, so-called 'legally', or not.

The music/movie industries are sooo fat now, that they can play these games, that they never win.

However they can become a 'real' problem, since they are attempting to openly threaten our basic freedoms.

And the only way to combat them, is with our continued efforts to express ourselves with our speech, OSS, P2P, and other mechanisms which show these dirt bags, who reallly has ALL the power.

-- SORRY!! But I'm still a proud member of SlashDot :)

These are the choices we make (3, Insightful)

Quixote (154172) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467461)

Here's what will happen: a bunch of geeks will get their panties in a twist, maybe dash off an email or two to a few politicians, and then go back to their video games and D&D.

Here's what needs to happen: put your money where your mouth is. Set up a PAC (Political Action Committee); fund it liberally so it has a lot of clout; and let it loose after the politicians who sponsor legislations which hurt consumers. In the end, it's all a matter of money. If you people are willing to put your money where your (loud) mouths are, then you can expect change for the better. Otherwise, just bend over and take it quietly from the *AA.

EFF has its place; but it's not a PAC. You need a Consumer's PAC, with at least $10M+/year of budget, to have a serious impact.

Re:These are the choices we make (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467502)

I'm willing to hand 5k a year to that idea. But who's going to do the same?

I can't fund 10M a year by myself. That's exactly the problem we're facing. We're many, but we're not organized. Together, we'll probably have more money on our hands than the RIAA and its henchmen combined. But they have a structure behind them, and money too.

And how many of us will think "Well, 5k a year... with that money, I can just go and buy the DVDs/Games/whatever I want..."

All this surprises you? (3, Insightful)

Newer Guy (520108) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467482)

The United States has been on the slippery slope towards becoming a third world country technology wise for over a decade! Corporations have virtually unfettered access to our elected officials, who bend over for the ca$h they fill their bank accounts with. THIS is the reason for what this article speaks of - We have the best Govt. that money can buy!

Consider this - though the (analog) VCR was invented by Ampex, a USA corporation (now defunct I believe), not a SINGLE VCR was ever built in this country! I don't believe that there is a single motherboard or other computer part that can claim to be 100% USA made either.

We are a country of takers and users and Congress leads the pack in taking! WHEN (not if) our style of living falls flat on its face, we'll have no one but ourselves to blame!

Re:All this surprises you? (1)

zlogic (892404) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467692)

I had a Brother word processor, made in something like 1991, and it had a sticker "Made in USA from domestic parts" or something like that. Intel or AMD (I think) may have a few plants in the US of A.

The late great Mancur Olson (5, Interesting)

Budenny (888916) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467490)

Olson was puzzled why economic growth was faster in the South, after it lost the civil war, and also why France in the 19c after having had three or four revolutions and two catastrophic war time defeats had grown faster than Britain under stable rule. He concluded and showed that long periods of stability allow vested interests to accumulate anti competitive practices which enrich them at the expense of the whole.

We are looking at a classic example of this. Consider those who profit from the DMCA. Olson's insight was that it is in their interests to impose costs on society as a whole which are many times, maybe 100s of times, greater than what they themselves receive, as long as what they receive is more than they otherwise would.

Let interest groups carry on behaving like this for year after year, and gradually the costs imposed on society become so great that economic growth slows or stops totally.

Then, only a dramatic structural change, abolition of the accretions, will help. The good news is, it helps dramatically.

In an ideal world, the various Federal Agencies would counterbalance such interests, because they, being nominated by people elected on a broader basis, will have it in their interests to represent the country as a whole. However, special interests are ingenious and find ways through, and this only works by fits and starts.

It can be done. Thatcher did it in the UK. Democracies can do it, when they see the need. This is the good news, the bad news is, it has to get pretty bad first!

Re:The late great Mancur Olson (1)

cyber-vandal (148830) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467546)

Thatcher was a disaster for the UK and paved the way for the takeover of the economy by the vested interests you mention.

dvd software for copying (1, Insightful)

rjdegraaf (712353) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467492)

From the article:
"You're likewise out of luck if you're looking to buy software that lets you copy a DVD onto your laptop's hard drive; it's no longer for sale, at least not in the United States."
Yep, it has been free for a long time, it's called vobcopy and libcss.

Re:dvd software for copying (2, Informative)

idonthack (883680) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467819)

And those are illegal in the United States.

Hurting customers in more ways than one (4, Insightful)

alfs boner (963844) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467493)

The DMCA hurts consumers in more than one way.

First, it hurts the end user or consumer by imposing government restrictions on how we use things that we "own". Or more to the point, we no longer own things that we buy.

It also hurts us that we don't see competition. This means higher prices, collusion, price gouging, and all the other nasties that come along with pseudo-monopolies.

We are further harmed by the lack of new jobs and opportunities. Real growth for our country is not in the 1000+ employee multinational corporations, but in the small companies employing 25 or less employees. The DMCA seriously harms innovation and prohibits companies that are more truly American companies from growing, making money, paying taxes, and employing more workers.

And we get the short end of the stick when these companies no longer need to innovate from the unnatural monopoly caused by the DMCA protects them from newer, more competent competitors. Not only do we not see the innovative, improved, products from fresher companies, we also see outdated technology from the companies that have lost the need to improve in a free market system.

Frists psot (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15467499)

I don't support the DCMA, however... (3, Insightful)

Zadaz (950521) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467512)

This is just obvious. In fact this is what the DCMA intended to do. Just like other laws put hitmen (mostly) out of business and Coke had to stop putting coke in the Coke.

My question is, if this is such a big deal, what are you doing about it? If every person who was pissed off about this gave $100 to a lobby to fight it, we'd have it overturned by next week. Imagine the political power that could be brought against the MPAA/RIAA if we took our DVD/CD money and spent it on lobbyists...

(voting and writing to representatives is for wimps)

Re:I don't support the DCMA, however... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15467569)

but u can still buy coke.

Re:I don't support the DCMA, however... (1)

plasmacutter (901737) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467615)

there are several multimillion dollar lobbying groups which have been lobbying agianst the DMCA.

Further, over the years they have sollicited and received support from such powerful groups as the ACU, the HRRC, Intel, Microsoft, Apple, and a sleu of other tech companies.

The obcene amount of power wielded by hollywood lobbyists, and the fact that several congressmen are directly receiving residual income from royalties(mary bono for one), continues to prevent the overturning of this special interest sell out.

Re:I don't support the DCMA, however... (1)

Zadaz (950521) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467731)

Where did Hollywood get the obscene amount of money used to enact and retain the DMCA? Oh right, from us.

Either we ('mercians) really do like the DMCA or we're hypocrites.

Re:I don't support the DCMA, however... (1)

plasmacutter (901737) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467777)

or we don't like the DMCA but have overriding issues which are even worse.

just because there's something worse to address doesnt mean what is bad is not bad.

For instance.. i'm one of those people complaining about the lack of medical care.. i can't find health insurance for god sake! while this is more important to me than the dmca.. i'm still pissed about it and still follow the issue and write my --thoroughly deaf-- congressmen.

I'm sorry but... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15467526)

...I really don't see the point of broadcast television or their adverts any more. Here in the UK, cable companies are offering TV on demand, just pick the programme you want and watch it, no adverts, pause and rewind, etc. Of course, it's limited because the programme-makers have to agree, but I don't see why you can't just attach a quid or so per viewing. They already offer that service with films, so why not TV programmes as well?

I miss the times Microsoft was the top bad guy (5, Interesting)

Marcos Eliziario (969923) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467550)

Really,
Microsoft still is evil, and I know that they happily jumped into the DRM wagon too. But when I compare today's news with the past I get a chill. Our rights are being ripped in a astonishing fast pace, and hollywood is suceeding in making things that even Microsoft never dreamed off.
The sad part is that they are likely to succeed; The average people don't understand the ramifications of those laws, and when they question their representatives, they are easily convinced by some crappy explanation in the line that this kind of laws helps to prevent terrorism, or save americans jobs or something like that.
But the truth is that RIAA are a threat to capitalism and free market. They are blocking inovation, subverting the law, and turning law-abiding citizens into criminals without they even knowing that.
We have to stop them. Know! Maybe it's time for another Boston Tea's party.

Give Me Flexibility or Make Me a Criminal (2, Interesting)

ziny (971499) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467582)

As a consumer I prefer flexibility. The more options I have for using a purchase the more likely I am to buy it. In what other industry exists the mentality that the more restrictions that are placed on products the better off the industry will be? Imagine if you could only buy a particular brand and style of shoes to go with a particular brand and style of suit or a particular brand and size of nails to use with a particular make of hammer.

Everything that the entertainment industry is suggesting is causing me to think more and more about what my options will be for circumventing restrictions so that I may "enjoy" music and video in the manner I desire. It scares me when I stop to think that I am trying to devise ways to break the law.

Be that as it may I have no doubt that as greater restrictions are placed on what I legally acquire in both media and electronics I will buy fewer legitimate products and put my resources elsewhere.

Does anyone watch ads they record with Tivo? (2, Insightful)

jackjeff (955699) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467637)

ReplayTV's TiVo-like devices which featured sharing capabilities, along with automatic ad skipping; the company was sued to bankruptcy, and the reincarnated device supported neither sharing nor ad skipping

Whenever I use a VCR to record something, I really enjoy the fast forward to skip ads. In fact, I usually prefer using the VCR than watching the thing live for that very reason...

So I wonder. Does Tivo prevent you to make a fast-forward? Otherwise, wtf about this ad skipping capability... no one is gonna watch ads if they have the ability to skip them by pressing a button. No? Am wrong?

Thank you DMCA, thank you MPAA/RIAA (5, Funny)

jbssm (961115) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467714)

I would really like to thank you all.

Now I can sleep well in the evening knowing that after a day full of downloading copyrighted music and movies, not paying a cent for them and still making copies of what turns out not to be junk to give to my friends ... I'm doing my role to make this world a better place to live.

What next? (2, Funny)

Phantom784 (973144) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467766)

Next thing you know, they're going to make microwaves illegal so I can't get up and make popcorn during the commercials.

So what? (1)

wheatwilliams (605974) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467775)

Some people think that protecting copyrights on music, literature and film is more important than technological innovation, and that technological capabilities should not be allowed to dictate how society and the marketplace deal with music, literature and films. Some people think that democracy should determine protection for intellectual property, regardless of what technology might be capable of doing with it. Otherwise technocrats will have the power to rule over and damage art, culture and literature. I'm a computer geek who is also a musician and I think this is a valid point of view.

Re:So what? (2, Insightful)

plasmacutter (901737) | more than 8 years ago | (#15467785)

except it's not.

the point of copyright is to insure compensation, not control. Copyright does not equal property, it is only a right to be the exclusive seller. Just because you monopolize a market does not give you the right to start regulating others because you've reached the limit of what you can squeeze from your market.

if they are worried only about revenue streams, then they should be requesting levvies. they are not, theyre demanding control, and a technologically illiterate congress is giving it to them and stifling huge sectors of the free market.

dmca loophole (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15467790)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesnt DMCA apply to US buisnesses only?

Seems to me the perfect way to get around this bullshit is to start the company in europe.

I dont recall that shipping or selling equipment that voids the DMCA is somehow an offence, so the company could export it's products to the US market too. The company is not a US company and thus shouldnt be subject to its laws. I dont know about import regulations however.

This is somewhat different, than lets say, selling a FM band radio transmitter. I know you have the FCC (I think its the FCC anyway, IANAAmerican) cracking down on kids that get the more powerfull "illegal" kind of FM transmiters to screw with neighbours radios or start their own pirate radio stations and whatnot. Ofcourse this was more popular a decade ago. (I seem to remember a movie by this story, something with that kid who was in "Cuffs", cant remember the title).

Anyway, my point is, for DMCA to be enforced on companies is fine, but where's the regulation that disallows selling equipment that violates the DMCA? I see it beeing perfectly legal to sell equipment that violates DMCA, but since the equipment can't be held liable, and the company/maker from another country (like any country in europe, except france since it's not really a country) isn't subject to the DMCA, where's the [...] problem?

They are fighting a losing battle (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15467796)

Unless martial law is instated, where homes get regular visits from armed **AA forces making sure nobody in the house in using entertainment products "illegally", they will never win.

Biggest reason, the younger generation doesn't give a damn about supposed Intellectual Property and it's ilk. Just yesterday, I was speaking with my nephews at the request of my sister to talk to them about not downloading songs from the Internet. My nephews don't think anything is wrong with it. They don't care about law or who makes what money (and they're certainly old enough to understand). They know they just want to hear what the latest song that their friends are listening too. Then they give me this excuse "everybody at school is doing it".

Personally, I don't care if they copy music. They will eventually get old enough to pay for it if they choose. And I am way out of the demographic the **AA cares about. I can live just fine without their oppressive views on how the public should enjoy entertainment. Besides, people will eventually wise up and go to more live events.

When the was phone passed back to my sister I told her, "Unless you want a potential lawsuit on your hands from the RIAA, ban the computer from the kids. Because unless you're will to control their Internet time (she's not technically savvy at all), they will download music wihout any concern for potential consequences."

Of course I know that won't happen and they will continue to copy music and get the idea that entertainment they want right now they can download from the Internet. Eventually, enough of these younger generation kids will get into powerful influencial positions in the government and start to change the laws.

Personally, I am for a much more rapid way of changing things. Massive coordinated attacks on the entertainment heads who are ripping the public off. Not just financially, but culturally as well. Well that's certainly illegal and it won't accomplish anything anyway. I sure do dream about it some days though. Those assholes in the entertainment business make my blood boil.

The world has changed enough for the artists to promote their work themselves. It is easy enough these days. For the ones that don't to, let them find any of the new small numerous promoting companies that will do it for them.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...