College Funding Bill Passes House, P2P Provision Intact 222
I Don't Believe in Imaginary Property writes "Ars Technica is reporting that the College Opportunity and Affordability Act passed through the House today with a vote of 354-58 and the anti-P2P provision is intact. That provision would require universities to filter P2P and to offer legal alternatives. They are claiming now, though, that universities would not lose federal funding if they fail to do this. Of course, an amendment that would have clarified that was withdrawn immediately after it was offered."
E Pluribus Denarium (Score:5, Insightful)
GOOD (Score:0, Insightful)
What's needed for this madness to stop (Score:5, Insightful)
Elsewise, it might become very popular and profitable to set up some kind of P2P-friendly VPN service, with endpoints just outside the DMZ of various college networks...
Students will pirate music, yet buy $60 games (Score:1, Insightful)
I think this is a push in the right direction, even though its horribly wrong the way it was pushed through via the bill.
"Legal alternatives" (Score:4, Insightful)
Since P2P filesharing is legal (though sharing particular files may not be), and there are no other alternatives with the same features, this seems to be nonsense.
Re:GOOD (Score:2, Insightful)
a college is not a classroom.
Re:Students will pirate music, yet buy $60 games (Score:4, Insightful)
Free speech considerations.... (Score:4, Insightful)
Anyone else besides me think the SCOTUS would wipe that particular provision off the books the moment that Harvard, Yale, et. al go to war with the RIAA? Hint: those two schools alone have more legal ability backing them and all the financial resources required to go to legally go to war, and in fact, more than all the RIAA companies combined. Not to mention that the RIAA really really really doesn't want to piss of Stanford, because the majority of the RIAA companies are in California, and it's not that far a drive from Stanford to any State court where they would choose to go to war themselves.
My question is, why aren't our congressmen and women smart enough to vote that particular piece of junk OUT of the bill?
Re:Students will pirate music, yet buy $60 games (Score:5, Insightful)
The fact of the matter is, music has COMPETITION. The days of the $12 CD making sense are long, long gone. People aren't sitting around hoarding their money. No, they spend it on *other entertainment products* such as DVDs and video games. Look at how CD sales have dropped and how DVD/VG sales have risen over the past few years. To call it hypocrisy is BEYOND STUPID. You would have to stone cold batcrap bonkers to not realize it's a matter of the music industry being unable to compete for the entertainment dollars of its demographic.
And yes, buying music like that would indeed make someone poor, or at least *feel* poor, because it is a POOR FINANCIAL CHOICE in the face of what the competition is offering. A movie costs as much as, or less, than its soundtrack much of the time. A game can offer a dorm's entire floor hours of entertainment and the game industry THRIVES on that, whereas the music industry does what it can to make sure that if a dorm's entire floor is to enjoy hours of music, it will cost not $60 but far more, trying their best to tie it not only to an individual, but to a particular device that individual owns.
I don't even know why I'm taking the time to post this reply; if you had the intellectual capacity of a dixie cup you would have the sense to not post what you did.
What REALLY concerns me... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Here is some Clarification (Score:3, Insightful)
If I tell someone I'm "developing a plan to explore" implementing X, what I mean is that I will probably never get around to *actually* implementing X -- X is likely to be implemented roughly at the same time hell freezes over -- I just want you to go away and leave me alone, as I have more important things to do *right now*. (like reading
Re:Students will pirate music, yet buy $60 games (Score:3, Insightful)
I just paid 35$ and 40$ for 2 cd's. Before I hear how stupid I am, listen.
They usually go for 3000 yen.. in Japan. They were on sale for 2700 yen, and shipping ate up the rest. Now, who are these people who I'm willing to spend ~=80$ for? Ali Project. They did the opening for Hack//Sign roots, Noir, and many other anime. They are also incredible (to my standards).
I found the first songs (from aristocracy and noblerot) on WinMX years ago.. and recently found the Ali Project Incomplete torrent pack. After downloading that, I wanted the other new songs that the pack didn't have. Youtube had them in vid format, but I wanted the pretty artwork also, so I ponied up the money. I dont feel ripped off in the least, and I'm happy with the quality.
Because I heard them on a fansubbed anime, I found the torrents. Because of the torrents, I bought, from Japan no less, 2 CD's. That's money they made cause I was exposed to their music (and I didn't have a credit card since I was 25.. dont need the debt cause school has enough).
The higher the quality of what I like, the more chance to get my money. Better work for it
Illegal? Where's the law. (Score:4, Insightful)
I was unaware that P2P is illegal. What law am I violating when I download Linux ISO via bittorrent? Or use World of Warcraft's built-in torrent system to download updates to my game?
Federal funding = federal chains (Score:4, Insightful)
Remember this, the next time you advocate government "helping" things by funding them. If a special interest has an axe to grind, a congressman or senator who is not accountable to you (best case: accountable to citizes in another state, worst case: accountable to the industries who fund him) will impose weird conditions for the money, and it will effect your life. You can violate the conditions and opt-out of the money, but the people of your state don't have the option of opting out of the federal taxes whence the funding came. Still want public education? You can still have it: you just have to pay for it twice.
Biotech? Sorry, only if nobody at the institution uses embryonic stem cells. Astronomy? Only if you don't publish anything that mentions Earth's weather. Education? Don't get me started. Oh, I guess this story is one of the numerous examples.
You'll know a true "science president" or "education president" when you see him. He'll be the one running on the platform of slashing all the funding, and vetoing the seemingly-pro-education bills. He'll say, "I will protect your education budget from those who aren't accountable to you." Let the state taxpayers keep that money in their state, and decide for themselves how they'll use it. That way, if industry buys some people in the next state over, at least you will still have a chance to get what you want.
Move the power to as close to home as possible, and it gets that much harder to pull bullshit like this.
How this bill could be unconstitutional . . . (Score:3, Insightful)
Copyright, by it's very nature, only protects that which is an embodiment of a creative idea. .
Re:What's needed for this madness to stop (Score:1, Insightful)
I have no desire to see P2P become a profit generating technology. That would just prolong the death of companies that have no right, in a fair economic system, to exist.
Re:Here is some Clarification (Score:3, Insightful)
Didn't matter that the voting age was 18, or that you could be sent to a combat zone by the military at age 19. Statistically, the car insurance companies were having to pay off a disportionate amount of damage claims by 18-20 year old drunk customers, but if drinking was legally raised to 21, they would be able to skate on paying claims. "Hey, we're not liable if they broke the law!!" Kinda reminds me of why they wanted seat belts legislated into effect. Seat belts save lives, see, and a live person can be sued SOOOOOOOOOOOOOO much easier than a dead person's estate...
Re:Not really a win. (Score:5, Insightful)
Welfare for the rich, once again.
With our government increasingly owned and operated by big business, it's no wonder that the one CEO that was running for president has been run out the race by a disgusted electorate. It seems like although many citizens could never elaborate fully on their instinctive negative reaction to Mr. Governor CEO, they know in their bones that there's a very very good reason NOT to have someone with experience in the corporate executive suite in the White House. Remember, these are the kind of people who get captive Boards of Directors to vote them 9-figure bonuses when the Company does poorly, while expecting "givebacks" from their workers and closing plants. That's the last kind of person we need running government at the moment.
Forget separation of Church and State. It's time for separation of Industry and State. Increasingly, "Big Government" seems preferable to me to the "lean, mean, cut jobs, cut costs" approach that's brought on the "get mine and get out" attitudes of the leaders of commerce. It wasn't always this way. Yes, there were plenty of fat-cat Industrialists in the first part of the 20th century, but there was also a few truly patriotic business leaders who believed that you couldn't sell your product if your customers weren't working and making money to spend. This was replaced by the "if we can't sell cigarettes here, we'll sell them to the stupid third-worlders" mentality (notice the drastically increasing levels of tar and nicotine in the cigarettes sold in Africa and Asia).
If we ever slide into full-scale class warfare in this country, there's not going to be a lot of pity for CEOs or their hired lobbyists or their fully-pwned elected officials.
A bill in Congress for funding higher education that gives subsidies to the Entertainment Industry. Fucking Hell.
Re:Here is some Clarification (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Here is some Clarification (Score:2, Insightful)
Need to start somewhere (Score:3, Insightful)