Fair Use advocates silenced by Big Brother (Register)

Posted Jul 20, 2002 15:12 UTC (Sat) by rmdirms (guest, #2659) [Link]

After sending the letter, I realized there are some things I forgot to cover. I realize that there will be issues with crypto and end-to-end deliver of content. Can someone tear apart and help reshape my stance so it is technically more to the point? My main point is that industry and government are standing on dangerous ground by opening the forced use of DRM. Voluntary use is one thing, but forcing (as Sen. Hollings/Disney/and others want) DRM on EVERY new piece of hardware and in ALL software released is stupid, dangerous, and power-wielding. I felt this way before 9/11 and still feel this way. There are other means for the government to snoop and spy without choking off the very critical and necessary relief valve called free speech, free expression, and creativity.

To: http://www.ta.doc.gov/comments/comments.htm

Below, in +++++++++ was sent by me on 19 July 2002 at 0847 hrs

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I am an author/self-publisher who copyrights my self-created material but I intend to NOT use DRM. What have you to say about that? Does the government/Hollywierd ientend to tell me I MUST use special crypto to assure end-to-end identificaton of seller-buyer details? If I am willing to take the risk of some occasionally non-paying consumers of my information, then who is the government or ANY other agency to say I have to play along?

You see, the PROBLEM I have is that DRM users who wish to send information to ALL people might someday have foisted upon them code which denies the intended recipient (who may for any reason choose to NOT use "DRM-user-modules") any reading or viewing of the material. This tantamount to planned defacto
censorship. It is a despicable prospect, if this is where hollywierd is heading.

Someone MUST answer this possibility and prevent it from being exploited. This DRM issue, I suspect, is really a smoke screen. I think it is likely that a number of "forces" really are out to remove the self-publishing benefits of the Internet and WWW by gradually turning e-mail into government/megacorporation-licensed broadcasting and then requiring transmission licenses. It isn't as far-fetched an idea as it seems. Think about it: in the 1960s, only mega conglomerates could talk to the world. It was expensive, difficult, required coordination, and not everyone got the messages if their existence was discounted. Now, in 2002, a $150 PDA can be a source point of transmission. Anyone with truth or falsity, inane or mind-blowing, startling, painful, enraging TRUTHS could propagate warnings, information messages, and so on. Hollywood, microsoft, and even the Government will eventually wish to clamp down and "license" people to speak or risk them going to jail. Why? Greed and Profits. Anyone disagreeing with Nike's stubborness to raise the overseas boats with the the US corporation money tide will CERTAINLY wish to quell global complaints. Why should Reebok (of USA) in Vietnam NOT raise the daily wages. IF the US wants to be a respectable, global role model, then I DARE SAY that Capitalism must STOP exploiting foreign local markets, stop stimying foreigners' local growth, and if pay the foreigners wages that are unheard of locally. We, the US do NOT deserve a place in the GLOBAL MARKET if we allow our businesses to ditch "expensive ($20/hr) workers" in favor of "cheap ($0.25/day) workers" and then raise the tide but swamp the boat. This is the kind of messaging that microsoft, hollywood, and any OTHER US corporation trying to sew up and control thoughts, ideas, processes, product introductions, and product longevities would desire to suppress, label as inflammatory, defamatory, libelous, illegal, and anti-American. We are a global environment, and it is time we be less greedy for $ sake and be more giving and public-responsible for HUMANTIY's sake. So, I guess you can call me what I coined as a "CapUnist", if you must label me. I don't subscribe or ascribe to labels.

I realize this sounds over the top, but it WILL NOT BE PERMITTED. Life flows better when there are "just enough" minimal rules to restrain truly wanton, criminal acts. Communication and free expression of basic thoughts and non-copyrighted materials is a fundamental human right. It is surpising that the US and UK are so bass-ackwards when it comes to the issue of Rights of the Author vs Will of the Industry. Now, the industries are regularly buying off certain authors and ensuring their ability to operate as Industry and Author, further subverting the ability of newborns-turned-kid/adult author to freely express new spins on old material. This is NOT fair to future children of the world. Industry CANNOT and MUST NOT subvert the future prospects of the MASSES. Industry should be FACILITATORS-to an extent, but NEVER MASTERS AND TOTAL OWNERS.

You have, now, a few new (if new) issues to ponder before you let Industry destroy your chances to rectify and forecast the situation.

Think SMARTER and ACT WISELY for the GLOBAL PUBLIC future, NOT the greed of megalomaniacal, omnivorous, heartless corporations making ALL other smaller, far less greedy corporations look bad.

THINK!
THINK!

David Syes

Posted Jul 20, 2002 15:19 UTC (Sat) by rmdirms (guest, #2659) [Link]

BTW, I also posted it at my website:

http://www.jabybi.com/gpage2.html

where I publicly/freely released my business plan to the wild. There are SOME minor restrictions, but the juicy stuff is the fact that I am working on a Linux-based Internet Cafe, and helping others get one going. See my company Security Policy. (I have yet to start it due to lack of funding). The main thing here is that it would be nice to see some US-based Linux-based Internet Cafes flying defiance in the face of ms so that more people are less afraid of Linux.

I am not very kind at all to ms in my book/web site, but I don't think I am too loony-raving of a Linux person. After all, I still--to an extent-- use w98, but far less than before June 99.

Regards,

David Syes