Some Fundamental Questions on Fair-Use-vs.-DRM Issues? 26
InspectorPraline asks: "I'm doing a paper on the 'cultural aspects' of both sides of the MP3/DMCA/CBDTPA/DeCSS/etc debate, and I'm trying to find out some of the possible reasoning behind why each side feels so strongly about the way it feels. (Yes, I do understand what I'm doing.) Specifically, since the Slashdot crowd is presumably on the opposing side to the RIAA/MPAA side, I have a few questions I'd like answered so that I can do a well-informed, balanced paper (note - this isn't an opinion paper, merely a statement-of-fact paper)."
"Feel free to answer (or not answer) any of the following questions:
- What do you think the legal (or appropriate) uses of MP3 technology should be?
- We all know the RIAA complains about the illegitimate uses of P2P technology. Since its most prevalent usage is (by the RIAA's definition) illegal use, what are some applications of the technology that the P2P crowd can use to swing the tide in its favor?
- The DMCA is frequently seen as a flawed piece of legislation which is easily abused and so broadly worded that such abuse is unpreventable. Despite this, what positive or useful elements can be taken from the DMCA and used to formulate a new law that would do what the media companies want without infringing on consumers' rights?
- An argument frequently levied at the RIAA and MPAA is that they are more than content to label the large majority of consumers as thieves and pirates. What can the RIAA and MPAA do to change this? How can these organizations polish this image up?
- With laws such as the DMCA and possible future legislation such as the CBDTPA, many consumers feel that their freedoms to enjoy the entertainment they purchase are being slowly eroded away by content companies. What rights (other than the right to listen or view) do you feel that consumers should have with media they purchase?
In a nutshell: (Score:2, Insightful)
Consumers want as much as they can for free.
Re:In a nutshell: (Score:2, Insightful)
Get Rid of the DMCA, use the DFCA (Score:5, Insightful)
"1. Congress Shall Pass no law restricting your ability to do anything digitally that you can do through handwritten, and or Analog means.
2. Congress shall not allow the granting of a patent for any device that would knowingly impinge upon your ability to do anything digitally that you could do via handwritten or Analog means.
3. It shall be unlawful to distribute technology which would knowingly violate the Free Speech and Fair use intentions of the Consitution of the United states of America.
4. It shall hence forth be understood that once "content" is purchased, it is the purchaser's right to do what ever they choose with that content, and shall have the right to do as they have always been able to do via handwritten, or analog means.
5. Congress Shall repeal the DMCA it does not serve the people of United States in any fair way shape or form. It abridges the freedoms that are set forth in the constitution.
6. Congress shall pass no law which prevents fair use of media, nor shall it support any initive which would do the same.
6a. it shall be illegal to develop technology or any other means which would prevent fair use of media.
7. It shall be illegal to attempt by means of contracts take away the rights of the author of a work. That is, copyright can not be transferred, and the creative person or group thereof behind a work _always_ holds the copyright.
8. There shall be established reasonable copyright limits on created works, that are equivalent to a period not to exceed the reasonable financial lifetime of the work. 8a. Each major version of software (ie. v1 v2, etc) shall have a copyright period not to exceed 6 years past the time that version is not longer available for sale. In this time the software publisher will have most likely published a newer version, ceased to exist(how can a company which doesn't exist reasonablely hold a copyright anyway), or abandoned that line of software.
8b. Films and audio recordings shall hold a copyright for no more than 20 years from their original theater/video(for direct to video releases only) release date. New editions and releases of the film which change the content of the film through adding or deleting of material shall be covered by their own copyright period, and shall not extend the copyright period of the original work.
9. If there does not exist a method of using media for a particular harware/software platform, and the publisher of said media does not make a reasonable effort to provide a viewing or conversion method then I shall be legal for a third pary to create a method, by whatever means required to do so, and distribute/profit by it.
9a. In the case of new distrobution/storage/playback/viewing methods which become available in the market(hardware or software) the original publisher shall enjoy a 2 year grace period during which to make their works available via this medium."
Perspective [type='personal'] (Score:2, Insightful)
MP3 is an audio compression technology and, like JPEG, or MPEG, compression, is a valid way to make audio files smaller while sacrificing as little audio quality as possible.
2. We all know the RIAA complains about the illegitimate uses of P2P technology. Since its most prevalent usage is (by the RIAA's definition) illegal use, what are some applications of the technology that the P2P crowd can use to swing the tide in its favor?
I don't know that P2P can ever unsully its image. Napster's court case has forever altered that; a new name would help.
3. The DMCA is frequently seen as a flawed piece of legislation which is easily abused and so broadly worded that such abuse is unpreventable. Despite this, what positive or useful elements can be taken from the DMCA and used to formulate a new law that would do what the media companies want without infringing on consumers' rights?
Current copyright laws, prior to the DMCA, are still sufficient. The DMCA was an attempt by content providers to undo hundreds of years of case law in copyrights, which essentially spells out the reasons for which a consumer of copyrighted material is allowed to copy otherwise protected material. It was, and still is, a power grab, and is neither necessary, nor fixable.
4. An argument frequently levied at the RIAA and MPAA is that they are more than content to label the large majority of consumers as thieves and pirates. What can the RIAA and MPAA do to change this? How can these organizations polish this image up?
By noting that, at least in the RIAA's case, their member organizations are making money hand over fist. Clearly, even if the majority of their consumers are, in fact, "thieves and pirates," there is more than enough money for them just in the pockets of the people who are paying full price, or "market price," for their content. It is capitalist, and free market, to desire to turn a profit. It is "Capitalist Pig" and very anti-free market to want to make all the profit in a given industry or market segment (see: Microsoft, US Oil, AT&T).
5. With laws such as the DMCA and possible future legislation such as the CBDTPA, many consumers feel that their freedoms to enjoy the entertainment they purchase are being slowly eroded away by content companies. What rights (other than the right to listen or view) do you feel that consumers should have with media they purchase?
Consumers buy copyrighted material for their own use. They should have the legal right (oh, wait, prior to the DMCA, they did have the legal right) to make copies of it, on whatever material they desire, for thier own peronal use, as long as they don't: claim it as their own, original work, use it commercially or publicly (this is not personal use), or make copies for another's personal use. Note that it should not be illegal to sell copyrighted materials that one has paid for, for a profit or at a loss, because you are not only selling the material, but the copyright as well. Frankly, for that, you could give it away, but only once, and you couldn't keep it or a copy after giving it away (you, again, transfer the copyright, and you no longer have a "right to copy").