EFF: 48 Hours to Stop the Broadcast Flag 702
The Importance of writes "Think the Broadcast Flag is dead? EFF is warning that Hollywood is trying to sneak the broadcast flag into law as an amendment to a massive appropriations bill. 'If what we hear is true, the provision will be introduced before a subcommittee tomorrow and before the full appropriations committee on Thursday. That gives us 48 hours to stop it.' Action Alert here. List of Senator's phone numbers here."
senators (Score:5, Insightful)
Why.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Is playing dirty somehow beneath the good guys? Oh, that's what makes them the good guys...
Re:I wrote about this to CNN (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:BroadCast Flag (Score:5, Insightful)
Met a Bill I Like (Score:5, Insightful)
Every bill must have a scope. It must apply to a single budget, or a single government organization, or their subsidiaries. Or it must be a "metabill", which specifies only a collection of bills related in an explicit policy, the exact relationship stated in the metabill.
Of course, Congressmembers should be voting against these big bills, with arbitrary attachments, on the principle of government manageability. But they obviously don't - they're all codependent on letting each other's attachments pass, often regardless of consequences, in exchange for the same favor later on. So we need to force them to stop doing it. Because the mass of laws, their inner complexity and scale, is killing the ability of anyone to participate in our democracy beyond any significant confrontation with the law. When only the lawyers win, we all lose.
Why do you still have riders? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Met a Bill I Like (Score:3, Insightful)
But you US-ans should be so lucky. The problem you're settled with now is one which should be obvious: in a nation where no-one takes the sciences, but a lawyer is glamorised (along with other law enforcement agencies like the police, CSI etc), you end up with a nation of lawyers.
And if your populace is composed of lawyers....they'll do what lawyers do, which is to create laws. And after all the sensible laws are made, they'll add more, and obfusciate the system until a non-lawyer can't possibly understand the law anymore.
And then there come the laws which are only good for the lawyers and the ones paying the lawyers...which the general public won't pick up on, because the law has become so cryptic that little by little, what used to be common sense and common law is no more.
Re:Why do you still have riders? (Score:4, Insightful)
It's illegal here in the US, too....It's just condoned.
What the hell is wrong with our government? (Score:2, Insightful)
Did it ever occure to you yanks... (Score:4, Insightful)
How about spreading some democracy in your own back-yard before trying to take over the world.
Re:Met a Bill I Like (Score:5, Insightful)
OTOH, the evolving Web, especially decentralized social networks, might turn out to best feature pornopop idols like Paris Hilton. I think the next few years, especially as mobile multimedia networks defined by people's contact lists begin to dominate, are the defining moment for the next few (human) generations of mass media. It's up to us to take the spotlight back from lawyers, and feature more real people.
Re:I didn't think you could (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:I wrote about this to CNN (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Why do you still have riders? (Score:5, Insightful)
Police: "Ok, bribes are illegal, don't take bribes."
Politicians: "This isn't a bribe, it's a campaign contribution."
Police: "No, it's a bribe, and if you take it I'll arrest you."
Politicians: "Oh, ok, sorry."
Whereas in the US the conversation goes something like this:
Police: "Hey guys, 'bribes' are apparently illegal now, looks like we're gunna have to be honest and do our jobs for a change."
Politicians: "Don't be silly, we'll just call them campaign contributions."
Police: "Uhhh, look, I'm not sure you can get away with that."
Politicians: "Really? Here's a contribution to the campaign to help you see things my way."
Police: "Heh, ok, I get ya, it's not like anyone is minding the store anyway."
And no-one was.
Email is counterproductive (Score:5, Insightful)
I am highly critical of these online petitions, because people believe that they have done something, and therefore will not follow up their web form tick-off with something more substantive like the communications mentioned above.
I know it's a bit too late to dash of a handwritten letter to your rep in this occasion. But a phone call may be appropriate.
Revolution anyone? (Score:1, Insightful)
In all seriousness though, our constitution has certain articles and bills with in, should "our" government get out of control... perhaps it was time we started to look them over?
Re:Met a Bill I Like (Score:5, Insightful)
Please. Did you see what happened to the Interstate Commerce clause? They can relate any two things easier than you can tie it to Kevin Bacon.
Re:Why do you still have riders? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:I didn't think you could (Score:3, Insightful)
Orwell just rolled over in his grave (Score:5, Insightful)
Ok, so here we have the FCC mandating that we have to all convert our "old analog" television sets to digital television sets by 2007 or something...
Then we have the "Broadcast Flag" being driven through on a rider, shh... nobody will notice.
And now they can basically control what you can record via your "Dish DVR" or "TiVo" or TV tuner card or whatever other device you want to use, because of Hollywood pressure.
We already see DVDs where you can't bypass the intro commercials to get to the navigational menus, even for DVDs which we bought, which should have paid for the removal of those commercials.
Next, we'll see television sets being sent a signal that ignores the remote control's "channel" buttons during commercials. You just won't be able to switch away during commercials... you'll be forced to watch them (or power off your TV).
How far are we from a Telescreen here, really? I mean... all they need is a way to peer back in, and a way to stop you from turning off the TV or the volume...
Orwell would be proud.
Re:Email is counterproductive (Score:5, Insightful)
And at 200 calls per-hour, they'll just stop answering the phones. Seriously, do you think they're going to listen?
Going down there in person is a hit-or-miss chance of actually speaking to someone with the power to change anything... or you'll end up in jail for "stalking" your senator.
The reason they probably slid this through on a rider so fast, was likely so people could NOT write to their senators in time.
I love my government more and more every day, don't you?
Follow the open source philosophy (Score:2, Insightful)
Software:
- Companies make proprietary software
- Then charge a lot
- Have copyright law to prevent copying
- People gripe
- People makes free software.
Movies/Music:- Artists make movies/music
- Companies package and market it
- Then charge a lot
- Have copyright/DMCA law to prevent copying
- People gripe
Why not the next step: People make free movies/music?Re:Revolution anyone? (Score:5, Insightful)
s because you sound so much cooler talking about revolution than talking about campaigning for election, right? Actually putting liberty, to say nothing of your life, on the line, has nothing to do with your tough talk.
Re:heh (Score:1, Insightful)
Why should the president have authority to change the bill without it going back to congress? What would stop him from leaving in the stupid attachments and vetoing everything else?
Re:Email is counterproductive (Score:2, Insightful)
They need votes. Your information is a likely vote for their next election. Not in district of representative = not a voter.
-r
Re:Oh Crap.. (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:senators (Score:5, Insightful)
If we actually hated America we'd be happy to let our so-called leaders destroy the hell out of it. We're fighting them. The proper conclusion should be obvious to anyone whose brain is not made of sour cream.
This is what I wrote my Senator (Score:5, Insightful)
Media oligarchies, led by the RIAA & MPAA, tried to sue the VCR out of existence. They sued the first makers of MP3 players. They sued ReplayTV into bankruptcy because they dared to introduce an innovative product without the MPAA's permission. If the broadcast flag and similar legislative tools had been around for the last 25 years, we wouldn't have the VCR, iPods, TiVos or computer DVD recorders. These tools have helped democratize content creation, distribution & consumption by putting citizens/customers in charge of their home-made movies, music, and photographs.
Vote against the Broadcast Flag. It is simply a power grab by media oligopolies intended to criminalize the fair-use of media of Americans of all stripes.
DUPE NEEDED (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:We still can use our VCR (Score:5, Insightful)
As for utilizing the analog hole, yes, that remains possible, but there are serious drawbacks - remember that we're talking about HDTV here - I'm pretty sure all the ways that that actually gets transmitted over the wire transmits the flag.
Now, obviously from a technological standpoint, this means nothing - there will be firmware hacks, instructions on how to assemble a flag stripper from $0.47's worth of parts from Radio Shack, and of course eBay. It will end up being slightly easier than disabling Macrovision, slightly harder than making your DVD-player region free. But the important thing is, it will be illegal!
Call me old-fashioned, but I'm fucking tired of everything I do being made technically illegal, even if it has no tangible effect. I'm not ripping anybody off, I'm not sharing with millions of my closest friends, I'm just trying to record telvision shows when I'm not home, and sometimes watch my DVDs or store my CDs on my computer. I'm not harming anybody, I'm not not paying someone when I should, and so it should. not. be. illegal.
Re:Don't think! Just do!!! NOW NOW NOW!!! (Score:3, Insightful)
Now, would you rather be manipulated by corporations who suck you dry, or Slashdot which, for whatever reason, is manipulating you to seek something that will benefit you (the stopping the Broadcast Flag)?
Would you rather be a Slashbot, or a corporate whore? Hey, it's your pick.
Re:Why do you still have riders? (Score:4, Insightful)
". .
"All opposed?"
(chorus of nays)
"Motion fails."
That's why.
Re:Why.. (Score:4, Insightful)
No, I think he means "paleo-conservatives" as opposed to "neo-conservatives" (the majority of Republican politicians being of the neo sort).
The Republican party desperately needs to split, but there is no place for them to go if they don't want to become Democrats. Under the broken US election system any third party attempt inherently throws the election against their interests. The third party spoiler effect - it tends to cripple the "major" candidate that would otherwise be closer to their preffered position.
-
Re:Don't think! Just do!!! NOW NOW NOW!!! (Score:2, Insightful)
The point of these "damn websites" telling us "what to do" is that you take a GROUP of people, all doing their part to police a little bit at a time. Then someone cries wolf, points out the reasoning behind it, and then we all can jump on the problem.
I am open to suggestions on how you think that an average person should stay "educated" on every bill, and every last word in those bills without a "FUCKING WEBSITE" instructing them on it's contents though. Please do enlighten us.
Re:heh (Score:5, Insightful)
1. Party X proposes legislation, concerns raised by party Y.
2. Safeguards added to legislation to satisfy party Y
3. Congress passes legislation
4. Party X president snips out safeguards and passes the rest
5. ???
6. Police state!!!!
Re:Orwell just rolled over in his grave (Score:3, Insightful)
You meant to say "which we licensed for limited use" - I'm sure the MPAA will forgive you this one slipup.
Re:heh (Score:2, Insightful)
Why bother... (Score:3, Insightful)
Isn't that a cheerful comment on the state of our nation?
Re:Orwell just rolled over in his grave (Score:3, Insightful)
Sound like the best solution I have heard so far.
Re:Post-Reading Test (Score:3, Insightful)
Which is all the more reason to change the packaging of these bills to the format that I described. With my way, Kerry could have said "I voted for the rest of the bill, but not the unaccountable $15B, which they still have mismanaged, though it's extremely necessary, so the whole bill didn't pass", or even "so I voted for a better bill the next month, which the Republicans voted down, because it lacked that bad section".
This kind of bundling is exactly the reason we need scope rules on bills. Scoping makes it harder for Congress to shove pet projects down each others throats, and thereby ours, because it makes them address the bundling explicitly, and gives a public voting mechanism to reject tangential bundles. And it makes their positions on bundles much easier to explain to the public, especially considering the kind of atomicity required of soundbites from nonincumbents, when the corporate media is the filter.
Get your mom to call too, don't forget that... (Score:4, Insightful)
That's where your mom comes in: she's a different generation and (on average) a different gender. This surprises the staffer, and they'll add a +2 to whatever your mom says.
She can use one of the standard talking points, or mention how she wants her techie child to continue being employed. And, if she has grandkids, then variations of "Nothing, but nothing gets in the way of my showing off hi-def videos of my grandkids to my friends" could be useful. Plus, sad to say, the staffers are more likely to believe her when she says that she votes (or contributes to campaigns) because (on average) its true.
Best Strategy: Boycott and Donate (Score:5, Insightful)
If you haven't figured it out yet, every time you buy a product you are voting with your dollars.
Other messages that might be equally appealing (Score:3, Insightful)
Remind them of a world of working people working wierd hours - late nights at the mall, night shifts, and the like. These are the forgotten people that all make our lives a little asier that are going to be most screwed by this evil broadcast flag. Not the people of Slashdot who can collectivley hack around most laws, but the bread and butter of each senators voting district who just do thier jobs and don't need the government coming in to tell them what can and cannot be recorded.
Re:heh (Score:3, Insightful)
Does this mean that U.S. Senators don't need to take calls from US residents ?
Could someone explain how this works ? Is this normal in the states ?
I think I would be a bit concerned if our politicians wouldn't even pretend to listen.
Re:Why.. (Score:2, Insightful)
BTW Ron Paul lived not too far away from my town when I was in high school in San Marcos in 1990. My civics teacher spouted some misinformation in class about the Libertarian platform, so I gave him copies of the LP handouts.
Re:Best Strategy: Boycott and Donate (Score:3, Insightful)
A centrist party would be supported by both sides. (Score:3, Insightful)
[1] Something the founding fathers seem to have forgotten, where's the bill of responsibilities?
Real American Comanies Innovate, not Legislate (Score:2, Insightful)
If you read nothing else, I can summarize this letter with one sentence:
"Real American Companies Innovate, not Legislate."
The so-called Broadcast Flag is an abomination and needs to be rejected by the Senate. It will do nothing to stop large-scale piracy, and will only serve to limit the fair-use rights of American citizens to time shift television programs, save them for later viewing or view tv programs at a family member's home. Authorizing the broadcast flag will force innovative consumer electronics companies to ask for Hollywood permission before introducing new products. (Note how quickly the cable industry has approved "Cable Cards" for receiving digital cable, to enable digital-cable-ready TVs - After two years, there is exactly one approved.)
The history here is clear. Large sheet music companies tried to sue the nascent recording industry out of existence. Radio tried to stop TV. Large media companies tried to sue the VCR out of existence. Only after the Supreme Court ruled in favor of fair use did they realize the revenue stream available to them. They sued the first makers of MP3 players. They sued ReplayTV into bankruptcy because they dared to introduce an innovative product without the MPAA's permission. If the broadcast flag and similar legislative tools had been around for the last 100 years, we wouldn't have the record players, tape decks, television, VCR, iPods, TiVos or computer DVD recorders. These tools have helped democratize content creation, distribution & consumption by putting citizens/customers in charge of their home-made movies, music, and photographs. The media revolution IS the story of American Capitalism at it's best.
In addition, if recording off-the-air was forbidden, innovative teachers would have had substantially less material for thier class. Many routinely use clips from broadcast documentaries to enliven thier classes. All this would have to bow to the MPAA's desire to protect their old revenue stream.
Please vote against the Broadcast Flag. It is simply a power grab by the large media companies, intended to protect their current revenue stream, without having to innovate, like every other sucessful American company has to. Send them a message - "Real American Companies Innovate, not Legislate."
voting system is to blame (Score:5, Insightful)
You're right, Duverger's Law (spoiler effect) is a feature (bug!) of the system itself, not any inherent flaw in the platforms of the minor parties. If we used Condorcet voting (not the same as IRV), every party could stand on its own merit. There would be no advantage inherent in being an incumbent party, or having the perception of being one of the most popular.
Of course, if everybody voted honestly instead of strategically there wouldn't be a problem either. But since that's awfully hard to do when the system encourages strategic thinking, we ought to change the system so that it encourages honesty. I don't know how we can have truly representative government if the people don't vote how they really think.
Politics isn't one-dimensional, so why do we think two parties can accurately reflect all political views? Politics is n-dimensional, for the n different issues that have become political. A strong multi-party system where everybody has a representative voice would be a big help.
Re:senators (Score:2, Insightful)
Also, Durbin's my senator, and he certainly isn't gonna lose my vote over this. Knowing this state that's a common sentiment. Illinois (at least up in the north-east corner where all the people are anyway) is what's called "still sane."
Re:senators (Score:3, Insightful)
(Also, the supreme court seems to think that this should happen in actual courts, with proper procedure and without secret evidence rather than the "tribunals" that Rummy seems to prefer.)
Re:senators (Score:3, Insightful)
Even if they are innocent? And we can't determine this yet because they haven't been tried by a court....