Preparing for the Broadcast Flag? 735
Couch Potato asks: "I'm worried that, come next July, the FCC mandated broadcast flag will soon take away all sorts of fair use rights I have long enjoyed. Given that there are only a few months left to make purchasing decisions, how best can one prepare for the advent of the broadcast flag?"
"I'm somewhat aware of projects like Myth TV, but it's not all that I want. Specifically, I want to make sure that I can record DVDs or similar files of any program I want off of cable, sattelite or broadcast TV, flag or not and without any other encumbering restrictions (such as the Macrovision DRM for DVDs) and without worry that someday they'll change something so that my old drivers and hardware are suddenly obsolete and useless when faced with updates to the formats. Note that this makes closed-source-only drivers an issue, because assuming the hardware can still be adapted to whatever they change on us, open-sources drivers can be modified and closed-source ones probably won't be, whether for legal or practical considerations. So then, what can someone with a modest budget do to make sure that their constitutional fair use rights don't succumb to planned obsolecense, like the VCR has?"
Write Some Letters (Score:3, Insightful)
If people don't care? Well, it's like the music industry's continued assault on aural quality. Too fucking bad. People are free to do as they will, and that includes fucking themselves over if they so choose.
Buy offshore (Score:5, Insightful)
How best can one prepare for the broadcast flag? (Score:5, Insightful)
Broadcast flag preparation... (Score:2, Insightful)
Chris
meh (Score:5, Insightful)
Nothing different anti-CD copying measures, anti VHS copying measures, anti video-game copying measures, and so on.
Nothing new here, move along
lemme get this straight. (Score:1, Insightful)
Never fear! Underwhelmed is here! (Score:2, Insightful)
Not worry about it.
1-I doubt it's going to be widely available come July.
2-It's a bad idea that's going to quickly be realized as a bad idea.
I doubt it's going to last long, especially for programming people pay for.
Purchase recommendation (Score:5, Insightful)
I think you are incorrect (Score:5, Insightful)
Your assesment is kinda wrong.
You've never experienced things like a state tax filing amnesty? librariers that have fine amnesty?
never heard of realtors trying to close deals before laws change so they can be grandfathered in and legal?
the Question is,
"HOW BEST CAN I PREPARE MYSELF FOR SOMETHING THAT IS LEGAL"
not, how can I circumvent the law.
the advice being sought is in fact, ON THE SIDE OF LAW and wholly valid, I'm glad to see the topic, I was thinking about snapping up some hardware myself.
As I understand it- and I'd LOVE to be courteously corrected, the law only applies to products moved across state lines (or into the country) so a product manufactured, marketed and sold in the same US state, is actually still a possibility.
(fabrication facilitys then needing to be built in each state of course)
No *real* way out of it without getting in it (Score:5, Insightful)
Sure, you can stock up on pre-broadcast flag HDTV cards, and you can do all sorts of other tricks, but to do what you talk of for long-term goals, you're gonna need to work from the inside of the "system". Like others have said, big companies can spend all they want on re-election campaigns, but they still get elected by those who vote.
What most people forget about American democracy is that it is designed to work well in facilitating peaceful revolutions- when people care and vote. The blame for the sorry state the American government is in lies with nobody save every last American citizen who is currently enfranchised (older than 18, etc.). And I write this as an American citizen.
This may be a solution (Score:5, Insightful)
Once the broadcast flag becomes standard, can't the FCC be sued for violating the Supreme Court order [virtualrecordings.com] mandating fair use in the Sony Betamax case? It would seem to be a slam-dunk of this argument is used.
Buy offshore (Score:3, Insightful)
And this is why any attempt to controll how an end user uses media will fail. The whole system will work as long as everyone plays ball. As soon as you have somebody that realizes they can make a better product by simply ignoring DMR/Broadcast flages/whatever, they will have 'built a better mousetrap'. And since implimenting copy protection takes extra effort, the product without it will cost the manufacturer/consumer less than other products.
And the best part is, if all the companies get together and conspire to squeeze out anyone who doesn't play ball, we just start filing anti-trust suits, and let the government dismantle them.
Lotsa Luck (Score:5, Insightful)
Problem being, too many americans are too busy watching their spoon-fed share of culture on TV to care what happens, as long as the crap keeps showing up on their bigscreen they're fat and happy.
Sticking you head in the sand helps nothing! (Score:5, Insightful)
Broadcast flags are utterly evil for two reasons.
First, they are contrary to our fair use rights to record programming via Universal v. Sony.
Second, they create perpetual copyrights. Under the current rules, broadcasters will even be able to stop recording of public domain programming. Why do broadcasters get greater rights than the creator?! That makes no sense. And what's so hard to understand about the phrase "for a limited time"?!
Merely sitting on the sidelines and ignoring the problem will NOT help! If and when broadcast flags succeed, similar systems will become even more commonplace.
Re:Buy offshore (Score:5, Insightful)
They can't stop millions of illegal aliens or hundreds of tons of drugs, but they can catch a container of tuner cards?
Simple (Score:5, Insightful)
But it's not that simple, after all. Because the problem is TUNING the content you want to record, e.g., from a satellite provider or cable operator. And since more and more of the digital content is encrypted, and is only able to be tuned by devices sanctioned by the provider, and all such devices will respect the Broadcast Flag, the answer is to "What can I do to prepare for the Broadcast Flag?" is "Not much."
Unless, of course, you don't mind recording from an analog connection, such as composite video, S-video, or component video. But the FireWire ports that are, for example, also mandated on all HD/digital cable set top boxes after 1 July 2005 will be mostly encrypted. One might ask the question, if they're encrypted, then what the hell good are they? Indeed. But what can you do in the face of a cable provider whose call centers don't even know what FireWire is, or who argues that "technically" the FireWire ports are "functional" (as required by the FCC), even though their output is encrypted.
The real answer, of course, is that these ports will interact with OTHER 5C-compliant FireWire devices that also respect the Broadcast Flag. There's no way around it unless you go analog. And that INCLUDES all the nice things on the EFF's page. Sure, you can tune over-the-air HD channels and record them. And that's great. In some markets, that may account for a lot of content. But you won't be able to digitally record content that is flagged as Record Never that you're paying for from a cable or satellite operator, because you need THEIR EQUIPMENT to tune to those channels. (Or, something like a CableCard in - guess what - another device that respects the flag.)
All in all, we'll be able to do less with our current (i.e., digital) equipment than we could do with equivalent equipment (i.e., the VCR) 30 years ago. And most of the operators won't shoulder any of the blame. They'll just point the finger at laws or at the content providers. And then what is a customer to do? The only thing you really *can* do is write your elected officials, and provide feedback to the FCC. Or, not buy any flag compliant devices, which might ultimately prove to be a very hard thing to do.
In sum: anything you buy now won't guarantee you recording of ALL content you might legitimately have access to, unless you're ONLY concerned about OTA recording.
Re:pcHDTV 3000 is a Great option! (Score:5, Insightful)
You mean the ones with complete contempt for the notion of the public domain, who have repeatedly bought extensions to the duration of copyright in order to deny us the free use of our own culture?
Yeah, they're thieves all right, and they're the ones who've brought this situation upon us. It really sucks.
Re:Write Some Letters (Score:5, Insightful)
There is no, repeat, NO hope of galvanizing a significant enough fraction of a Congressman's demographic to make a difference in an election when it comes to issues like intellectual property.
The only thing you can do is move out of the country or just continue to civilly disobey.
Re:Ween yourself from the Toob. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:The 4-step "Who cares, TV sucks" program (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Move (Score:1, Insightful)
Say stupid things attempting to belittle people and you just sound stupid mommy.
Broadcast Flag (Score:5, Insightful)
But suppose you know where those bits are, and what they mean, too. Why couldn't you simply flip the ones you don't like and then record or whatever? All you would need is a serial to parallel converter to turn the serial stream into a 16 bit parallel bus (for example) and them suck those bits into a DSP, where you do a little bit bashing. Then run them into a parallel to serial conervter to reconstruct the transport stream as seen by your digital disk recorder? If you have a commercially made unit, it will be looking for the flag bits, so it will know what it can or cannot do, but your freshly set bits tell it that this program is OK to record and play as long as you like.
I think such a device is likely to appear as a small plastic box with 2 firewire ports and a wall-wart, selling for $20 in a year or two.
Remember Macrovision on VHS? Do you know how easy that was to defeat? All you had to do was to make your VCR run with fixed video gain instead of AGC all the time. A little hardware hacking was all that was needed. This shouldn't be much worse. But don't try bit bashing after the compressed video is expanded. The data rate there is likely to be upwards of a gigabit, and most folks don't know how to make PCBs to handle stuff going that fast. This is precisely why the DRM folks want the interconnects to be 1 gigabit or faster. But remember, the "broadcast flag" must be readable in the 19.3 megabit transport stream.
Re:Write Some Letters (Score:5, Insightful)
With that said, I agree with the rest of your point. The problem here is that majority rule does not work when the majority doesn't care. People need to wake up.
Re:Buy an HD TV tuner card (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Write Some Letters (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Write Some Letters (Score:3, Insightful)
Oh ... you meant 2 other groups of people -
Last I heard, racial profiling was still policy ...
Oh ... you meant 2 other groups of people -
Last I heard, the rich weren't worried abut the draft ...
Oh ... you meant 2 other groups of people -
Last I heard, you could get blasted on booze but go to jail for pot unless you were president ...
Oh ... you meant 2 other groups of people -
Last I heard, steal a car, get 10 years in pmita prison - rob a billion, get 5 years or less ...
Oh ... you meant 2 other groups of people -
Last I heard, adults can smack kids, but kids aren't allowed to smack adults ...
Oh ... you meant 2 other groups of people -
I disagree - people are willing to spend more time on stupidity than on the real issues. TV is more important to them than whether the person down the street has adequate medical care and equal access.
What I foresee is the comeback of the TV BRICK. Remember those - foam bricks that looked just like the real thing.
Hopefully people will start producing comedies and stuff using animation kits and we can get rid of the whole "syndicated TV" hellhole.
To answer the original poster's question - how to prepare for the broadcast flag - stop stressing over missing a stupid TV show. It's NOT REAL! It's NOT IMPORTANT!
And for all those trekkers who started the fund to save their fav. tv show - as William Shatner said on SNL - "Get a Life!"
Producers should not be enslaved to the Consumers (Score:1, Insightful)
What right do you have to claim it as "your" culture? Did you create it? Did you exert a single creative impulse to make it come into being? No, it was the copyright holders. Sure many of them did not actually create the material either but the material's creator gave them the copyright in exchange for, what they considered, fair compensation. You have no right to stand there demanding free access to the IP that someone else created on the basis that it is "your culture". What arrogance!
I create plenty of IP as I am a software engineer and your attitude smells of slavery. You want to force the IP creators to give away thier creations so that you do not have to expend any effort in acquiring it your self. That amounts to the producers becomeing the slaves of the consumers and that is wrong.
I have said it before, and I will say it again, the Open Source movement has got this right. The Producers ( open source developers amoung which, I count myself ) have choosen to release thier software under a license that grants the consumers ( open source software's users ) the right to use it free of charge. When the artists/producers choose to do the same thing, then you can copy it around to your heart's content. But until then, you are a thief if you overstep the bounds of fair use. Fair use does not include making copies whole copies for others' to use with out paying.
The problem with the broadcast flag is that it impinges on fair use. Fair use allows me to make a copy of something for my own use and keep it indefinately but the broadcast flag requires that the recording be deleted after a proscribed interval. This is wrong and should be fought against.
Re:Ween yourself from the Toob. (Score:3, Insightful)
I consistently download 8 shows a week, ranging from Sci-Fi to comedy, to drama.
Then I stream them to my PrismIQ. I have plenty of entertainment throughout the week, but feel no need to woprk around anybody else's schedule but my own. And I don't see commercials, to boot.
It probably won't last, but it works for me now.
Re:Write Some Letters (Score:5, Insightful)
How would we know? The corporate media would never tell us even if it actually happened.
Re:What "fair use" rights do you want!? (Score:1, Insightful)
A common error... you are confusing certain acts explicitly enumerated in copyright law as "not infringement" with acts of fair use (not explicitly enumerated in copyright law, but which encompass all other cases of "copying a work, or portions thereof, without infringement occuring").
Copyright law says that certain acts (e.g., creating archival copies of lawfully-obtained software) are specifically not infringement. If (for instance) I get hauled into court because someone finds a burned copy of Corel Office Suite 8 in my home, I do not call "fair use" (Title 17, Chapter 1, Section 107) - I instead pull out the lawfully-obtained copy I bought while in college and point to Title 17, Chapter 1, Section 117.
"Fair Use" (in section 107) talks about reproduction of copies for uses not explicitly exempted as "not infringement" elsewhere in copyright law. It gives an exemplary (not exhaustive) list of four things that should be used to check whether or not a given case is "Fair Use" but "Fair Use" is to be examined on a case-by-case basis.
In other words, what the article poster asks to do MAY in fact be "Fair Use" or it may not - that will have to be decided by the courts, not by you or I. In fact, the Sony-Betamax decision sets a precedent that what he seeks to do is in fact "Fair Use"...
"noncommercial home use recording of material broadcast over the public airwaves was a fair use of copyrighted works and did not constitute copyright infringement."
Another important note from the same case:
"[Copyright] has never accorded the copyright owner complete control over all possible uses of his work. Rather, the Copyright Act grants the copyright holder "exclusive" rights to use and to authorize the use of his work in five qualified ways, including reproduction of the copyrighted work in copies. All reproductions of the work, however, are not within the exclusive domain of he copyright owner; some are in the public domain. Any individual may reproduce a copyrighted for for a "fair use"; the copyright owner does not possess the exclusive right to such a use."
If I might be so bold as to alter your question a bit, I ask copyright holders, "what rights do you want?!?" (Copyright law gives you but five!)
Let's face facts here - the broadcast flag is an attempt to gain full control over the work - no more, no less; a level of control which the Supreme Court itself says they are not (and have never been) entitled to.
The question is not, "why is Joe Sixpack trying to grab rights to which he is not entitled?" (and it should be noted that in this case, legal precedent says that he IS entitled to these rights) and rather, "why are copyright holders trying to grab rights to which they are not entitled?" (Which IS what is happening with the DMCA, the Broadcast Flag, and so on).
The hardest part of learning is asking the right questions... you still haven't learned the right questions.
--AC
Re:Producers should not be enslaved to the Consume (Score:2, Insightful)
That strikes me as unfair, unethical and even illegal. Trying to avoid this new law, is just fighting fire with fire.
(how come they paid the congress? they just gave $$$ to the campaigns of the necessary people. Basically, they bought their votes. That is not democracy).
Re:Producers should not be enslaved to the Consume (Score:5, Insightful)
The problem is that scumbags keep retroactively increasing the length of protection, and that is cheating
Why is it cheating? Because the people that BUY your IP do so at a set price with the assumption that after they wait x # of years the stuff they bought today will be theres to do with what they want. That is one of the decisions they made when they bought it.
Example: Lets say that in 1968 I purchased one of the original film reals of star trek, for say $5,000. I get to watch it myself, but I can't charge cash to others to see it... YET. For just myself, it would only be worth $4,500. But I know that in 20 years, it will be a rare commodity and I will be free to charge people to see the film. My $5,000 is an INVESTMENT.
now 10 years later, some scumbag lier has convinced congress to change it from 20 years to 50 years. I just lost my investment.
The real problem is HOW MUCH DO WE WANT TO PAY INVENTORS/CREATORS for their work.
And while they are certainly entilted to a fair price, we - as the PURCHASERS of that work are entitled to negotiate a fair price - and that price includes a limit on how long you hold the rights to it. May be it should be shorter, maybe it should be longer, but once our society sets a reasonable time limit and you "accept that condition" and create the IP, there is NO POSSIBLE, FAIR REASON to change it. That is just thievery by cheating, greedy scumbags. It is no better than if Ford suddenly decides to extend the 5 year rental agreement with an option to buy after 5 years to a 10 years rental agreement, after you already signed the papers.
Re:Write Some Letters (Score:5, Insightful)
It comes back to the fact that americans are apathetic towards politics. If spending more money gets you elected, that's a reflection on the mindless drone voting public who will choose one candidate over another because they saw him on TV more.
There is no, repeat, NO hope of galvanizing a significant enough fraction of a Congressman's demographic to make a difference in an election when it comes to issues like intellectual property.
Yes there is, just nobody has organized a large enough group of people nor been vocal enough to make them care. This isn't just a technology situation, you can also include small businesses who are either have to pay large amounts for single licenses, or who are "locked out" of innovating new products due to the cost of complying with the wishes of the FCC. Also teach average people about how to maximize the use of their technology fairly, then watch them scream as their rights too are taken away.
Alternatively, politics isn't necessarily about the majority, it's about who screams the loudest. The FCC bows down to a group not because it's the will of the majority of people, but because the group represents the majority of communications between the FCC and the people (90% of complaints come from 1 group).
Re:Move (Score:5, Insightful)
As a Libertarian, my vote never gets anyone elected, even in local elections. So I am used to that. I have a comfortable chair.
This country used to be known as a country of individualists and, yes, anarchists to an extent. 'Tis no longer true of course, but I stand by our proud tradition of thumbing our noses at our government, poking fun at our ratlike leaders and ignoring laws and any other rules that I don't agree with. This is what makes me an American.
Re:Producers should not be enslaved to the Consume (Score:4, Insightful)
That's a circular argument. You're saying that the law should exist because it's the law.
If you don't want "your IP" to be public, then keep it tucked away in a corner of your mind. Take it to the grave if you want. If you want to put "your IP" into the marketplace, the public is willing to protect your work within reasonable limits.
The problem in recent years is that deciding what's reasonable is being left up to people who are clearly biased.
A monkey has the right to copy what he sees other monkeys doing. Shouldn't humans have equivalent rights?
You are forgetting... (Score:5, Insightful)
100% of the people who pay for cable are the ones who pay for cable! This might sound odd, but let me explain. The broadcast flag does not HAVE to be enabled at the source. The broadcasters can turn it on and off. If HBO started using the broadcast flag, they might change their minds if 10% of the people both wrote letters AND canceled their service. Men, you can grab by the balls. Companies, you grab by the wallet. The problem is that consumers TOLERATE this stuff. If ABC doesn't let you TIVO, then don't watch. Networks live and die by Nielson ratings.
I dumped all cable and broadcast TV over a year ago. I get my movies from Blockbuster, and I get my news from news.yahoo.com. I am happy.
Re:Producers should not be enslaved to the Consume (Score:5, Insightful)
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
Yeah, it's really awful that people can continue to benifit from thier creations for so long.
Wow, Walt Disney is still alive? What great news!
hell, if logic isn't enough for you the damn thing is enumerated in the constitution itself:
To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;
Re:Move (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Write Some Letters (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Simple (Score:3, Insightful)
The more I think about all of this, the more I think it may all come back to really bite content providers. I believe many people will be less likely to tune in to a broadcast if they know they won't be able to move it to their portable player or burn a DVD... and if I can't record it at all ( i.e. even on a compliant DVR ), there's just no way I'm watching it. If it's not on my TiVo, I already don't have time for it.
This ( not tuning into no-record content ) is likely to cause such DRM/broadcast-flagged content to decrease in market value... I could be wrong, but, maybe not; it wouldn't be the first consumer revolt. There's always Netflix and video games to occupy my ( limited ) free time if I can't time-shift my TV shows anymore.
Then again, I don't have much need or desire to move my DVR viewing beyond a single monitor, and perhaps that's what the content providers are banking on. As long as they don't get too greedy, they might win... which probably means they'll lose, in the long run...
Re:Similar question... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Not be a cynic but... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Write Some Letters (Score:2, Insightful)
It really ends up being the courts are the only mechanism for less politically relavent issues to be resolved.
To be honest, as long as my Tivo still works I'm not really all that concerned about the Broadcast flag. If they make it so I can't zap commercials, than I'll be up in arms.
Re:Write Some Letters (Score:1, Insightful)
Give up any hope you ever had of influencing the political system. It is completly and irreversibly corrupt and doesn't care unless you show up with a boat load of money.
Re:Move (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Producers should not be enslaved to the Consume (Score:5, Insightful)
Most Disney movies are based on old legends, fairy tales, and historical events. Those are pieces of my culture as much as they are Disney's. Content producers have the constitutional right to a limited protection of their works, after which they are expected to revert to the public domain.
If you mistakenly believe otherwise, then I hope you demand that the publisher of your "collected works of William Shakespeare" track down his rightful, legal heir and fork over the appropriate royalties. Or that Disney pays Hans Christian Andersen's family for "The Little Mermaid". Or that Mel Gibson found someone to pay for the rights to Jesus's life story. Otherwise, you're a corporatist hypocrite who doesn't really understand the "intellectual property" rights you seem to be in love with.
Dang, writing that made me feel dirty. I'm a pretty staunch conservative, but this idea that recent works based on old public domain offerings have some natural right to be privatized for the rest of eternity is just plain bizarre.
Re:You people make me laugh (Score:4, Insightful)
The constitutional issue present is whether the government can impose prior restraint on that speech (which is exactly what the DMCA does), and whether computer software is, for the purposes of the 1st ammendment, protected speech. The US Supreme Court has yet to rule, however at least on the 2nd half of the argument, the 9th circuit had ruled that computer software was speech in the first ammendment sense. The 9th circuit was set to re-hear the question en banc when that case (this one was about export regulations on encryption software) was made moot.
In short, no, you do not have the right to insist that copyrighted works be made "easy" for you to use. But I believe that the copyright holders do not have the right to prevent anyone from documenting the steps necessary to access their works. And if I am right, then any copy restriction regime is nothing more than a waste of everyone's time.
(IANAL, of course, but I play one in my mind)
Re:boycott DRM device manufacturers! (Score:2, Insightful)
Comment removed (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Lotsa Luck (Score:3, Insightful)
First they came for the Jews
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me
and there was no one left
to speak out for me.
- Pastor Martin Niemvller
Re:pcHDTV 3000 is a Great option! (Score:1, Insightful)
Yeah, the corporations lobbied to change the rules. So lobby against them the next time they try to do this.
But don't write about how the corporations are evil and produce junk etc and then bemoan that you can't freely record, store, and distribute that junk that those evil corporations spent millions of dollars to produce.
You want to defeat the MPAA? Stop going to the movies every damn weekend like a pavlovian dog.
You want to defeat the RIAA? Stop buying CDs of the junk you hear on the radio or see on MTV(2).
The world isn't going to end if you're not on the cusp of the latest pop-culture trend.
There is culture other than pop culture.
THEY CALL ME PASTABAGEL
http://www.pastabagel.com
Wait a sec... look who we are talking about here.. (Score:3, Insightful)
This is the same industry who let the CSS decryption code leak out.
This is essentialy the same industry who tries to copy protect XBOX and PS2 games, only to have $10 chips start showing up a week after the machines come out, or, better yet, loading a save game file that creates a FTP server you can log in to by way of a buffer overflow in a font package.
I don't think we have anything to worry about here, folks.
Let them make their piddly little broadcast flag. Give it a week and you will see a story here on Slashdot that says, "HD Broadcast Flag stripped from content with 2 lines of Pearl."
Re:Quotations out of context (Score:4, Insightful)
The parent mentioned that (and I paraphrase) as long as the rest of the country sat around snd watched (because it had nothing to do with them...yet) nothing would change, this quote says much more than its obvious meaning, you do more to trivialize it by narrowing its application than I did by sharing it. Also do you think the DVD thing is the only thing this broadcast flag can handle? It can have applications, such as disabling the 'manual skip commercial' features of future tivo-like systems, how about a flag that won;t allow you to change the channel when a certain commercial comes on, (ok this might be exxageration, but it makes a point), also the phrase shows how thinking 'well this is only happening in the USA, so fuck the yanks', when in reality, it will proably be adopted (perhaps by financial force) by other countries as well.
The words of the phrase itself do not apply, but the meaning behind it applies very much so.
I detest when such great quotes are marginalized.
Re:Write Some Letters (Score:3, Insightful)
Paul was writing to christians when he wrote this piece of "helpful advice" (for values of "helpful advice" equal to "not helpful at all") (1 Cor 7:
In other words, if you were a slave, "don't worry, be happy". And if you're a slave-owner, that's okay, because you can be a "good christian" and still own people - you don't HAVE to set them free unless you want to.Slavery has always been wrong. How hard would it have been to replace one of the 10 commandments with "You can't own people"?
Instead, it talks about (10th commandment) not coveting, including not coveting your neighbor's slave. This is talking to slave-owners.
That's not the issue (Score:3, Insightful)