EFF: A broadcast flag update [LWN.net]

EFF: A broadcast flag update

Posted Sep 27, 2005 19:36 UTC (Tue) by ncm (subscriber, #165)
In reply to: EFF: A broadcast flag update by euvitudo
Parent article: EFF: A broadcast flag update

Perhaps because everybody else is giving them *their* money? The laws are meant for everyone else's "benefit", but they restrict you anyhow. Furthermore, the only equipment most of us can afford is -- via economies of scale -- what is designed for the rest of them.

Region-free DVD players can be had today, but that's because only the DVDCCS has any quarrel with the manufacturer, and even they have no standing to bother the importer. When it is actually a crime to sell an unrestricted HD-DVD player, you won't find any. You also won't find unrestricted HD-DVD drives for your computer, or unrestricted video monitors. Just a little later, you'll find you can't even boot a Free Software operating system on the system you'd like to use because its binary has no official signature.

These things affect all of us.

(Log in to post comments)

EFF: A broadcast flag update

Posted Sep 27, 2005 21:00 UTC (Tue) by zotz (guest, #26117) [Link]

I just wonder how they are gonna try to put DRM features in my harmonica.

If I end up having to give up my job in tech and lead kayak tours in Abaco, so be it. I don't think they are going to be able to pull it off in the long term, but you never know with these things.

I do think that the more citizens around the world that we can get involved in the creation and re-use of copyleft material, the harder their job will be.

all the best,

drew
--
http://www.ourmedia.org/user/17145

EFF: A broadcast flag update

Posted Sep 27, 2005 21:27 UTC (Tue) by euvitudo (subscriber, #98) [Link]

Sure... just because everyone else seems to vote for "that other presidential candidate" tells me that my vote is pointless, and I should just NOT vote.

<sarcasm>That makes a lot of sense!</sarcasm>

If I don't want to support the industry, I'll quit giving them my hard earned cash. Furthermore, I'll stay away from illegal sharing because I *don't* want to give them a reason to gain more power. It's that simple.

I will also tell everyone else how I feel, and what I've done in response... you know... spread the word? How did Linux spread? How did FOSS spread? Certainly not on the backs of corporate slugs or their spineless politicians.

What I am trying to say is as follows: If you really feel emotional about it, quit complaining and start doing something about it.

EFF: A broadcast flag update

Posted Sep 28, 2005 5:20 UTC (Wed) by njhurst (guest, #6022) [Link]

That's unfair, as the very act of posting here indicates that they are doing something about it. The problem is that for every ideologically driven person there are thousands who quickly give up freedoms for a little short term gain (for example, almost all of my work place has switched from linux/unix to macosx; despite having claimed in the past that they don't like windows for reasons of freedom). You not spending $10 on a DRM DVD will have as much effect on the progress of DRM as King Canute on the tide.

EFF: A broadcast flag update

Posted Sep 28, 2005 7:02 UTC (Wed) by euvitudo (subscriber, #98) [Link]

That's unfair, as the very act of posting here indicates that they are doing something about it.

Really? Posting a comment doesn't mean that you are doing anything about it. However, I'll admit that I do not know whether the previous poster has done/is doing anything about it.

You not spending $10 on a DRM DVD will have as much effect on the progress of DRM as King Canute on the tide.

You are merely reaffirming my statement, to which I firmly hold. I also do my best, given the time I have, by advocating an exercise of freedom by not funding the media giants. Sure, $10 here or there doesn't make much difference. But when 1000 people agree and make the choice, then that turns out to be $10000. If 10000 decide to agree and make the choice, then that's $100000. Surely most people spend much more than $10 per year on their beloved media (remember we are discussing the broadcast flag for digital TV/Radio). If only 1000 average people decide and make the choice to no longer fund media companies, and assuming that these people pay $1320 per year to media companies (~$50/mo for Digital Cable/Satellite; ~$30/mo on DVDs; and ~$30/mo on music; pulled these out of a hat), then that's $1.32Million that they did not pay to the media companies. Convince 1e5 people, that's $132Million.

Surely there are more than 1e5 FOSS users that are aware of these issues. ;^)

EFF: A broadcast flag update

Posted Sep 28, 2005 12:33 UTC (Wed) by man_ls (subscriber, #15091) [Link]

Furthermore, I'll stay away from illegal sharing because I *don't* want to give them a reason to gain more power. It's that simple.

It's not so simple. It is not clear what "illegal sharing" is; it might even be disregarded as a contradiction in terms, as "sharing" should always be ethically acceptable and therefore legal.

In fact, they gain more power if you consider illegal an activity which was previously allowed. The music industry have succeeded to put fear into a generation of music lovers, and converting innocent sharing into a filthy crime. Hopefully, this situation can be reversed; and one way to do it is to engage in the questionable activity with acceptance of its full consequences. Another way is to defend those that are being prosecuted for it. I think we can make a difference; if it was not for Ed Felten and other brave souls, distributing software like DeCSS might have been cursed and be illegal by now.

EFF: A broadcast flag update

Posted Sep 28, 2005 7:27 UTC (Wed) by farnz (subscriber, #17727) [Link]

If it really bothers you, give up their content and write to your legislators (at all levels capable of imposing unwanted legal restrictions). Let them know that you've stopped purchasing media as a result of these restrictions, and that you would like them to vote against any further extensions of copyright, or increases in the power of copyright holders.

Yes, it's another small step, but it's a significant one for three reasons:

You, as a constituent who bothers to vote and write to their legislators, are scary to legislators. Firstly because you could vote for their opponents; secondly, because there is a good chance that you'll push friends and family to vote "because it's important". Your legislators do not want you actively opposed to them.
You've put your legislators on notice that you're watching them, and that if they vote for (e.g.) "Save American Disney Act", they cannot later decry the effects it has without creating a local scandal. If the result of the SAD Act is to get a sympathetic party jailed (local schoolkid, for example, or parents who were unaware that their child was using KaZaA behind their backs), your legislator knows that they cannot try and disclaim responsibility, as you'll call them on it. Not a position you want to be in when your opponent goes round accusing you of being against all that makes your local culture great. Further, they run the risk that you'll be sympathetic from a press perspective, and that there'll be a "Legislators Ignore Local Resident" scandal, just because the press want to get at them today (e.g. for refusing to organise a press pass to an important event for them). OK, none of these situations are particularly likely, but they all result in loss of office with disgrace in the worst case; most politicians really can't stand that idea.
Finally, you've given them an anecdote to use against the media giants' "piracy is killing our sales" claims. Unless your legislators are statistically trained, in which case they'll see through those claims too, you've added a group to the list that the media giants try and ignore: "people who don't like our restrictions and laws, so don't buy our product." Politicians tend to go in for point-scoring, and if bringing up the anecdote of you discomfits the person trying to buy a new law, they'll do it for fun, let alone the chance of extra money.