Hatch hatches new plan to foil the innocent. VCRs abolished?

[Neo Neko]

:angry: This! (http://news.com.com/Antipiracy+bill+targets+technology/2100-1028_3-5238140.html) :angry:

<rant type="tinfoilhat">
If this passes in any way shape or form I and a majority of innocent Americans could stand to go to jail for the rest of our lives. Can't anyone get that contemptable corporate shill out of government? I can envision it just like the McCarthy hearings on communism. Only it will go "Are you a copier? Yes you are! Guilty!". Witch hunt anyone? Why do es Hatch keep gettin re-elected.
</rant>

Just think if this choice piece of legislation were to pass as is. And what it would mean to all those countries that enter into fair trade agreements. They are unknowingly shooting themselves in the foot big time. Not that they could not do it themselves or are not preparing to do so already. But come on. The first time he suggested such it was just a novelty. But now Hatch's paid speech is getting old.

**eddited in hindsight to remove irrelevant language** :o

[trapvector]

Neo Neko, I sympathise...It's just another shining reminder that people don't own the government--corporations do. Technology is moving forward so fast that the corporations who stand to lose money (or perceive that they do) are lighting fires under the politicians and getting them to lash out in any way that they can. As for Hatch, who knows, maybe Utah is a sea of apathy. Off topic a bit--why is the US the only free world country without a public health system? Why is it required by law to insure a vehicle but not a person? I don't see anyone clamoring up on Capitol Hill trying to fix that. Other important issues take precedence I suppose. Back on topic--If I have a photogenic memory, does that bill mean my brain would be illegal too? Just a thought (and it's a copyrighted one too):D

[sysKin]

I think it's one of these laws that are not meant to be obeyed, but rather are meant to allow some people (corporations, this time) to sue everybody, whenever they wish.

I remember reading an article saying that there are many such laws in the US. I can't say if that's true.

It's not meant to destroy P2P software of course. All peer-to-peer software is downloadable thru internet - there is no US distributor to sue. It will prevent some people from visiting the USA but that's hardly a big punishment.

Anyway, it's obvious that products like VCRs and video tapes, cd/dvd burners and blank media, web browsers, A/V cables or video cameras all fall under this law. It's, of course, "for the court to decide" if these products are offensive, but that's completely beside the point, because no company will go to court against the giants. They will just go out of buisness or pay some "compensation" instead. After the "compensation" is paid, these companies will be allowed to breach the law in question, but will not be sued for that.

Radek

[Doobie]

What is the cause Orin Hatch's obsession? It seems like every few months he has a new idea for a stupid pro-RIAA law. As a conservative Mormon, why does he have an interest in protecting RIAA members' effort to profit from the filth they produce?

Follow the money. . .

[NobbyNobbs]

If you "Follow the Money" in The Corporated States of America, it would be great if someone followed them the other way, to see if there is any politician who is not grabbing for money werever they can get them ?
Much the same on this side of the pond sadly enough.

It actually looks as if Hatch is an honest politician after the american definition :D

[ppera2]

Hmm... this forum becomes more and more anti-american :)

I don't see anything specially new in that proposal. There will be something done against P2P services on Internet - I rather call them so, not P2P networks. Fact is that there is a big illegal traffic on such services.
Banning some recording devices will not pass, it's almost certain.

Other steps could be to prevent people to meet each other, so they can not exchange copyrighted stuffs... I really don't know any other measure wich will totally stop unfair use. So, what Neo Neko talked about living in jail has some sense :D

[Neo Neko]

Originally posted by ppera2
Hmm... this forum becomes more and more anti-american :)

I don't see it as un american. Implaying that this is contributory to this would imply that things are not the same in other countries. And it is. Hatch is like binladen only slightly more legitimate. Instead of blowing his followers up to kill people he just wants to blow up P2P users PCs.

Originally posted by ppera2
I don't see anything specially new in that proposal. There will be something done against P2P services on Internet - I rather call them so, not P2P networks. Fact is that there is a big illegal traffic on such services.

There is illegal traffic every day on our highways. So why don't we shut them down as well? Guns are most often used by most people to kill people so whay not ban them. It does not matter if there is anything new in the proposal. But the repeated proposal of such things makes the non uber nuts look sane and desensitizes us to it. If we don't take outrage to it each and every time it is brought up then one day it is just gonna pass so they don't have to deal with it anymore. And this time it is not just that loon hatch behind this bill.

Originally posted by ppera2
Banning some recording devices will not pass, it's almost certain.

I would not be so sure. They are close to doing that now. Like ordering equipment from lik-sang for your game system. If you order something even as simple as a piece of cable if it allows you to hack or copy games their import has been denied after the fact simply on the basis they could be used to violate the unconstitutional DMCA.

Originally posted by ppera2
Other steps could be to prevent people to meet each other, so they can not exchange copyrighted stuffs... I really don't know any other measure wich will totally stop unfair use. So, what Neo Neko talked about living in jail has some sense :D

There is no way to totally stop unfair use. It is not going to happen. Even if the US turns into a media controlled police state it is still going to happen more than they want. And they need to learn to live with it. Live with it and prosecute the actual offenders which they have all but not done since this whole P2P scapegoat came on the sceen. There is no argument that the street vendors in New York and even China selling illegal coppies are wrong. Go after them. Just leave the P2P people alone till they get some real numbers.

[Neo Neko]

Originally posted by sysKin
I think it's one of these laws that are not meant to be obeyed, but rather are meant to allow some people (corporations, this time) to sue everybody, whenever they wish.

Just like the DMCA. We were told it would only be used against criminals and such. It is now being applied to joe citizen who has never done anything wrong. They are at less risk. But they are still at risk none the less. They got their DMCA. They should be happy with it. They don't need more control. Just use the control they have and the means open to them.

Originally posted by sysKin
I remember reading an article saying that there are many such laws in the US. I can't say if that's true.

The thing with those laws is that it would be really hard for people to violate them or they are just plain stupid. For instance. (http://www.dumblaws.com/laws.php?site=laws&cid=184&region=25) Specifically... Minors are not allowed to purchase cap pistols, however they may buy shotguns freely. and Installation of bathtubs with four legs resembling animal paws is prohibited. And those are just the dumb laws of the city I live in. That page is full of many many more. For instance how often have we all been guilty of......It shall be unlawful to provide beer or other intoxicants to elephants.? The thing is we are not trying to get the government to spy on citizens and hold them guilty untill proven innocent untill such time as storm troopers can check the feet on your bathtub. :p The RIAA/MPAA do this with the laws they have in their favor already. Are we to believe that if they got this law they would stop that practice all together?

Originally posted by sysKin
It's not meant to destroy P2P software of course. All peer-to-peer software is downloadable thru internet - there is no US distributor to sue. It will prevent some people from visiting the USA but that's hardly a big punishment.

The problem with that is that these people are so nutty and so persistant that if they had their way all data transfers on the internet would have to be aproved by impartial 3rd parties and they would block all of what they deem unworthy content. Including P2P software pornography and foriegn servers. That is the kind of people Hatch represents. We would end up with more internet lockdown than China.

Originally posted by sysKin
Anyway, it's obvious that products like VCRs and video tapes, cd/dvd burners and blank media, web browsers, A/V cables or video cameras all fall under this law. It's, of course, "for the court to decide" if these products are offensive, but that's completely beside the point, because no company will go to court against the giants. They will just go out of buisness or pay some "compensation" instead. After the "compensation" is paid, these companies will be allowed to breach the law in question, but will not be sued for that.

Radek

I would not be so sure. I am being pessimistic I know. But I have not seen anything that could be construed as a victory for the people in IP law recently. It has all been in favor of business. And I just have to ask who serves whom? I thought it was the job of business to serve consumers and not the other way round. Business has more power than needed to do their job. And that just makes people like Hatch all the more offensive. No clue as to what's going on and no business being in the sennate.

[Mug Funky]

some laws are made to be broken :)
in cases like these, it's the citizen's duty to ignore such laws. a single company cannot file suit against 300 million people (i'd like to see what happens if they tried).


I thought it was the job of business to serve consumers and not the other way round.

the purpose of business is to make money. the purpose of government is to serve the people.

it's not the corporations that aren't doing their jobs, but the government.

i always wondered why america never had compulsory voting. it's been said often, but if somebody didn't vote, they shouldn't complain that the wrong guy got in, and is now screwing them.

if voting is voluntary, then candidates must inspire the people to get off their arses and vote. usually this is done with a very VERY long campaign and a lot of money. 90% of the time the candidate with the most campaign funds WINS.

corporations vote with money, and money can buy more than one vote for sure. so it's natural that corporations should be running the country.

of course, i'm not saying in Australia it's better - voting is compulsory, and we still managed to end up with John Fekking Howard, bringing us all back to the 1950s for another round. but there is FAR less corporate conflict of interest amoung our pollies. if an opposition minister for agriculture is found to have shares in a wheat concern, there's a big headline about it, and the person often resigns over it. how many major US politicians hold large stakes in oil companies? why does no-one worry about it?

hehe. i wouldn't say this forum is anti-american, but it's most definitely anti US government (as opposed to anti US populace)

[NobbyNobbs]

Maybe it was not the American defenition of an honest politician, it might have been Al Capones defenition.
(A honest politician is one that stays bought)

[Neo Neko]

Originally posted by Mug Funky
some laws are made to be broken :)
in cases like these, it's the citizen's duty to ignore such laws. a single company cannot file suit against 300 million people (i'd like to see what happens if they tried).

The RIAA is doing it 400~500 at a time. It is their new business model. Since they can't force people to buy what they want to promote they are going to sue for what you don't. Suing 300 million people at one time would bankrupt even Bill Gates. But extorting it in out of cour settlements a little at a time can provide a lucritive alternate source of income.

Originally posted by Mug Funky
the purpose of business is to make money. the purpose of government is to serve the people.

I had come to be under the impression that the purpose of being in business is to do business. And that money was a byproduct. ;)

Originally posted by Mug Funky
it's not the corporations that aren't doing their jobs, but the government.

It should not be a governments job to regulate all it's induistries. Not in a mostly capitolist society anyway. Corporations need to be accountable as well.

Originally posted by Mug Funky
i always wondered why america never had compulsory voting. it's been said often, but if somebody didn't vote, they shouldn't complain that the wrong guy got in, and is now screwing them.

Oddly enough compulsory voting would violate ones rights. It is everyones right not to vote. Though I agree that someone should not complain if they did not vote. I have made a habbit of voting since I came of age.

Originally posted by Mug Funky
if voting is voluntary, then candidates must inspire the people to get off their arses and vote. usually this is done with a very VERY long campaign and a lot of money. 90% of the time the candidate with the most campaign funds WINS.

Actually many votes are on party basis and have little to do with individual platforms. Then there are alot of people who's votes get bought in one way or another to serve an agenda. Ritch or poor their votes get bought. Growing up with parents who were in Unions I was exposed to that. My parents would vote for whom they thought was best. But the Union always had their candidate and they would always look more favorably if you supported him/her. Which was a doctrine many of their co-workers followed. Not that unions are all bad though. ;)Which leaves us with the smalles voting segment. Those that don't vote on party lines and have not been bought. And even among those there are educated and uneducated voters.

Originally posted by Mug Funky
corporations vote with money, and money can buy more than one vote for sure. so it's natural that corporations should be running the country.

That really depends on the country. If I were to believe what I was taught in my history classes it should be otherwise. There are some annoying skelletins in the closet for us to follow your theory. Our declaration of independance and the constitution. And alot of other countries have some similar doccuments. Ours specifically states "of the people, by the people, for the people" and "We the people". Not "for the corporations" or "We the corporations". :p

Originally posted by Mug Funky
of course, i'm not saying in Australia it's better - voting is compulsory,

Wow! Really? I definatly did not know that. What happens if you don't vote? :confused:

Originally posted by Mug Funky
and we still managed to end up with John Fekking Howard, bringing us all back to the 1950s for another round. but there is FAR less corporate conflict of interest amoung our pollies. if an opposition minister for agriculture is found to have shares in a wheat concern, there's a big headline about it, and the person often resigns over it. how many major US politicians hold large stakes in oil companies? why does no-one worry about it?

Yeah it would be nice if US politics could be a little more like that. I must say I was not suprised when I heard Haliburon was the company to get the goahead. No no vested interests there. :p Actually I would love for everyone to switch to hydrogen fuel cels. I could produce my own suplimental fuel at home. Now that would kick ass. I could use it to power my posessions instead of making fireballs rockets and explosions. :D Not to say that I would not keep doing that. :p

Originally posted by Mug Funky
hehe. i wouldn't say this forum is anti-american, but it's most definitely anti US government (as opposed to anti US populace)

I would not even go that far. I think we all get upset when any government takes similar actions that effect us on the topic of this forum. I am still quite dissapointed with recent events in the EU over software pattents.