Anti-P2P Law Looms over the Horizon 560
Adrian Lopez writes "MIT's Technology Review has a piece by Eric Hellweg about pending legislation known as the Intellectual Property Protection Act. According to Hellweg, IPPA could make it illegal to skip past commercials and could 'criminalize the currently legal act of using the sharing capacity of iTunes, Apple's popular music software program.' More information on IPPA is available at the Public Knowledge website."
Re:Legislation. (Score:2, Informative)
Let's ignore our legislators
That's not wise. Without uproar to counter these corporatism-driven laws you'll end up in jail for behaviour you thought legal. Ignorance is no excuse.
Dammit (Score:5, Informative)
It does NOT make it illegal to skip commercials.
It just says that this new exemption doesn't apply to skipping commercials. If there is an EXISTING exemption (or if the manner by which the commercials are skipped isn't even prima face infringement) then those still remain in effect just as they do now.
This is little more than a clarification.
That said, it is a bad bill overall, since there are a lot of other provisions attached with this one which suck, such as criminalizing copyright infringement even more than it is now, permitting the government to file civil suits for infringement, further gutting registration formalities, etc.
But this is one of the only halfway decent parts of it -- as it would tend to remove any doubt as to the legality of what Clean Flicks has been doing, and would permit other creative uses of EDLs, such as to edit Jar Jar out of Star Wars movies -- and so it annoys me quite a lot to see people's outrage arising out of a misreading of the bill. Be outraged at the rest of the bill, dammit.
Keep it coming (Score:2, Informative)
Re:lots of other victimless crimes to worry about. (Score:5, Informative)
There may be some costs to society. But the costs of prohibition are even higher. Prohibition does not work, and it never did. It only creates a black market ruled by criminals to fill the demand for drugs that will always exist. Drug quality decreases, increasing overdoses and toxic reactions to contaminants. Then there's the huge cost of imprisoning all of those pot smokers who could have been contributing to society just like everyone else. Prohibition is BAD medicine. Like quicksilver for diahrrea, it causes more problems than it cures.
I'm just too tough for you. (Score:5, Informative)
Fascism is corporate government. Usually politically controlling the people through fear, backed by application of force. It also usually includes arbitrary bigotry, to harness mass consciousness in the service of the new worldview behavior mechanisms: "Jews must be destroyed, so Germans must join the army", or "Gays must be cured of their sins, so Americans must elect Bush". Fascism is not just manipulation of information, strong words arguing points of action through connotations. Fascists aren't the only assholes. Fascism is very specific, though fascists are usually skilled as cryptofascists, hiding when it suits them. Fascists are masters of media, and much more insightful in the workings of the mass mind, which is innoculated and brainwashed every day in the mass media, without needing to strap individuals into chairs for psychohypnotic trance therapies and subliminal programming. That's what late-night TV is for.
Re:P2P is a "national security crime"?!? (Score:2, Informative)
Sincerely,
Another Victim of America.
weird stuff (Score:5, Informative)
"Intellectual property theft is a national security crime. It's appropriate that the fed dedicate resources to deter and prosecute IP theft."
Since when were you able to steal "creations of the mind"? I don't like this word game which intends to make copying stuff morally relative to stealing. If you are against corporations tightening the copyright law, don't use the term "intellectual property". The word "property" distorts and oversimplifies the whole idea.
Letter to my senator (Score:5, Informative)
People ought to be asking themselves, seriously, a much broader question: Should Congress to be passing laws that the majority of people don't want? A case can be made for such laws in the case of individual rights of minorities. But I don't see that a corporation merits any consideration whatsoever with respect to any law that restricts our freedom.
Re:lots of other victimless crimes to worry about. (Score:3, Informative)
Re:P2P is a "national security crime"?!? (Score:3, Informative)
You're making a common mistake: imputing human characteristics such as shame on lawmakers. It's called "anthropomorphism." Don't feel bad, some people even make this mistake for lobbyists.
Seriously though, they've been using this excuse ever since it became an excuse. Just look at what else they're trying to do this week:
link [latimes.com]
I, for one, feel safer already. There is a certain safety, that is, in watching the slow erosion of your system of government and knowing there isn't much you can do about it. There is, indeed, a sense of safety in helplessness.
Re:Lots of other [...] crimes to worry about. (Score:5, Informative)
From a 1993 DOT report [druglibrary.org], my emphasis. Besides, many many many people take benadryl without knowing it affects driving as much or more than alcohol. Please note that this is not an endorsement of driving stoned. [canoe.ca]
In addition, the drugs don't exactly have any real purpose aside from personal recreation
So? In a free country we should be free to persue what ever recreation we want.
There's also a bit more practical reason to illegalize pot usage in public places - just consider it to be the equivalent of a public smoking ban. People can still do it in their own homes, but it will work better than just considering it a criminally restricted substance.
I can see the paralell, but I'd be opposed to a public cigarrette ban too. I can understand banning smoking inside public (government) buildings. But in the open air, and in private (including places of business) buildings I see no possible justification. What could be less harmful to society than me lying by the river on a sunny day puffing a joint and reading a book?
Re:lots of other victimless crimes to worry about. (Score:3, Informative)
Now, federal sentencing guidelines REQUIRE that a person who GROWS pot (even a few plants) must get a 5 year minimum sentence, so remember, its better to support gangs and terrorists by purchasing pot rather than growing it... Yes, that has got to be the all time dumbest law on the books, but its still not mandated to go to jail for just smoking pot.
Re:I remember reading somewhere... (Score:4, Informative)
I dont think any respected source could claim edison 'invented' the light bulb.
More info HERE [wikipedia.org]
WRITE YOUR CONGRESSMAN (Score:2, Informative)
Stop debating about it here. DO SOMETHING. Write your congressman. NOW.