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."
BroadCast Flag (Score:5, Interesting)
48 hours? More like 0 hours. (Score:5, Interesting)
The broadcast flag is here to stay, regardless of the EFF's "48 hours" claim.
We still can use our VCR (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Met a Bill I Like (Score:3, Interesting)
Perhaps a good mechanism would be to require each bill to specify which paragraphs must be passed, itemized or by fraction, in order for the bill to pass. Then require each paragraph to be voted independently, then compared to the requirement, and enacted or discarded.
That mechanism might lead to really long paragraphs, with bundled specifications too difficult to manage in legal disputes. We might be forcing the Judicial Branch to throw out these "gumbo laws" as unintelligible. But we've got to somehow force the issue. Congressmembers and lawyers have made a hash of our laws, and our indigestion is going to be forced out somehow. Better on them than on us.
Our Founding Fathers messed up... (Score:4, Interesting)
The fact the Broadcast Flag has been inserted to another bill is an example of where someone needs to make a phone call to Guido and have him wait on a door step, ring the doorbell, and kneecap someone.
Some are more adept at doing it than others. One good example is a former KKK member. That should provide enough information to forego the necessity of naming them. Some of the network reporters are good at presenting some of the larger garbage ammendments but they never say who actually added the material to the bill.
Re:Why do you still have riders? (Score:5, Interesting)
Hi, welcome to the 20th century... well, you're a bit late, but that's OK.
Here in 20th-land we call any form of government where the people elect leaders, and where any citizen (with minimal restrictions, usually based on age, nation of origin, etc.) can campaign for those offices, a "democracy".
Yes, this does NOT fit the classical definition, but since no one has founded a democracy in a VERY long time (arguably never), it's not going to be very confusing as we continue to use the new definition.
If you're going to stamp your feet and hold your breath over it, you're really going to be unhappy, since most of the world started using the new definition [answers.com] (also, check out Wikipedia's excellent article on the topic of the modern usage of the word "democracy" [wikipedia.org]) at some point last century.
Why bother anymore? (Score:2, Interesting)
I for one hope they do. We need another revolution and complaining about tiny infractions like this story is just prolonging the inevitable.
Re:bite the hand that feeds you. (Score:2, Interesting)
Indeed. I've been thinking of canceling my cable TV service (although not my cable modem, Broadband is Life
I have no interest in downloading or sharing TV shows, so if they are going to try and treat me like a criminal, I see no reason to watch their crap.
Re:Met a Bill I Like (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:heh (Score:3, Interesting)
As much as they are abused there is a reason many things can be put in a bill. It is so a consecion can be made to the other side and things can keep moving along.
Re:heh (Score:3, Interesting)
The line-item veto gives the President an insane amount of power that he, as chief executive, has no right to. Anyway, do you really think George Bush or Bill Clinton gives a crap about the broadcast flag? Hardly.
A more realistic (and Constitutional!) solution could be reached if the House and/or Senate would amend their rules to disallow unrelated riders.
Re:Why do you still have riders? (Score:3, Interesting)
Let it pass (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:EFF has a site that will fax your senator for f (Score:2, Interesting)
I understand that for many the only hope of having a naked person in your bedroom, or any person outside of your immediate family, is the television, but that is no reason to waste time on this issue. It will not go away, and you will continue to loop the latest teen idol as they take off their clothes.
What we are seeing here is a result of televisions main purpose, to deliver viewers to advertisers. With the VCR, and Tivo, and the net, fewer people are watching the ads. This makes TV increasingly irrelevant. To make matters worse, the increase image quality really has nothing to do with bringing viewers to the advertisers, yet cost money. Furthermore, as advertising wanes, DVD sales are becoming more important. The increased picture quality might reduce DVD sales.
But given the general illiteracy and obesity of the American public, there is no better way to reach viewers than TV. Even the net requires to much interaction, and broadcast over the net is not yet practical. So TV cannot go away. So what we are going to see is what we are seeing now. People actively not buying the more expensive sets. People not buying the conversion unit because the useless extra hardware makes it too expensive. And ultimately no conversion happening because there are not enough eyeballs to make it worthwhile.
In the end, the free market may very well save us. In this case the consumer has the ultimate power because without the consumer, the advertisers have no reason to pay for the TV. And how few viewers are going to be worthwhile.
Or we could just chuck the whole TV thing and go read a book, or, if we want to watch sports, go to the local college.
Re:It's coming, no matter what. (Score:2, Interesting)
CEO's hate answering questions like that, especially with Wall Street listening. It might get something done, it might not, but you might find other shareholders (possibly with bigger clout) who share you view, and *are* in a position to do something.
Re:Why bother anymore? (Score:1, Interesting)
Dude, get over it. You're gonna foot the bill either way. Buy some shares in defence contractors (I made a 50% ROI in 2003) and get your tax dollars back.
Tip for 2006: Companies that make surveillance equipment.
I've been ten times happier since I got rid of my illusions. That bullshit about freedom? Democracy? Just like the antics of Paris Hilton, it's just prolefeed. Scrap it, get with your leaders' programme, and profit!
Will it work long-term? If you're asking that, you're asking the wrong question. It doesn't matter. Your leaders will find a way out for themselves. They'll have to telegraph their moves well in advance. Follow.
The proles? Let the fucking proles (whether they're of the Paris Hilton, Noam Chompsky, or the Rush Limbaugh variety) burn!
Re:I looked it up... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:The Final Nail (Score:2, Interesting)
Let it die. It might lead to people creating their own entertainment media. Which, of course, turns the equation on its head, as individuals who are content creators acquire whatever magic rights the entertainment industry chiefs presume are their exclusive domain.
Re:Best Strategy: Boycott and Donate (Score:1, Interesting)
But should we boycott all of the media? I understand how buying their products just fills up their war chest, but I think that collectively and publically targeting a selection of specific movies, TV shows, etc., would be more effective. Hopefully this would focus the attention of the media and the public (not to mention activists) on individual events, instead of a diffuse campaign against everything the media touches.
Re:Why.. (Score:3, Interesting)
(wishful thinking...)
Re:Revolution anyone? (Score:5, Interesting)
Voting doesn't help; you're voting for one member of the existing system, or another of the same, or you're voting for someone who can't win.
Worse, if you DO manage to vote out the incumbent, the rules of the House and Senate assure he has no real influence until he's been around for a while and therefore has fully aligned his interests with those of the system.
Letter-writing doesn't work -- such campaigns are often ignored, and those who prefer the status quo can and do mobilize their own campaigns.
Demonstrations don't work. If they're peaceful, they're ignored. If they're violent, the side opposing the status quo gets blamed. If they're peaceful and too big to be ignored, agents provocateur ensure they become violent, thus discrediting them.
Civil disobedience doesn't work; the penalties are too high, and once you've been convicted of a felony you've forfeited your political viability within the system -- as well as your chances of even making a decent living. Nobody cares if you're rotting in jail for violating an unjust law; you're just a criminal.
Even bribery (legalized or otherwise) won't work. Those supporting the status quo have more money. And the campaign finance laws are set up (not coincidentally) to help out the incumbents; those who have the most to gain by maintaining the status quo.
There is some mis-interpretation of the flag uses (Score:3, Interesting)
2. The broadcast flag will NOT stop you from recording a show. Your VCR, TIVO, PVR, etc will still work. The uproar of not being able to time shift would be too great for them to kill it. (Obviously)
3. The broadcast flag WILL stop you from being able to publish a broadcasted show over the Internet.
4. The TV/Movie industry has methods to stop/track recordings from cable/satellite and their Internet transmissions. In some cases they are not using them, in others they are being developed.
5. The broadcast flag already exists in the content, the legislation is intended to force the hardware to recognize it. Manufacturers can voluntarily act on it now if they choose. But why would you add a feature (raise cost) if you don't have to. Thus the legislation is needed to get the hardware to do what the TV/Movie industry wants.
I don't care if it is implemented or not. Yes, I time shift continuously as my kids are not allowed to watch any night time TV. No, I don't get any TV or Movie content from the Internet. If I missed the show I missed it. I'll pick it up in reruns if it is important to me, which generally it is not.
As for commercial skipping, studies have showed that people that fast forward through commercials have the same retention rate as people that watch them all. Now is this saying that people intelligent enough to program a recording device are smarter than those that can not? I don't know. It's all open to interpretation.
Re:Real American Comanies Innovate, not Legislate (Score:3, Interesting)
Next they void their retiree health benefits and offload employee pensions to the government.
High-paying jobs remaining in the reorganized company are then sent off to another country where labor costs are lower.
Finally, they give their CEO and Chairmen multimillion dollar golden parachutes.
The CEOs ride off into the sunset as rich as can be. The employees are then sent off to work at fast food restaurants where they can rest easy knowing that at least they can be assured that they'll have social security when they get older...
Oh yeah. Forget that last part.