What is Digg?Sponsored by Travelzoo
Take Advantage of Ridiculously Low Holiday Airfares view!
travelzoo.com - Flights $52 and up for Thanksgiving, Christmas & New Year. But move on it now.
84 Comments
- Yez70, on 10/12/2007, -1/+120This bill only does the following for you:
* Make "a compilation of audiovisual works" for classroom use,
* Skip commercials and "objectionable content,"
* Transmit files over a home network,
* Access works in the public domain, and
* Access works "of substantial public interest solely for purposes of criticism, comment, news, reporting, scholarship, or research."
Ironically, these actions are pretty much already legal - this bill just clarifies that and adds more protections for the companies and corporations that facilitate the above actions. It does not add ANY consumer protections at all, for any action.
This bill DOES NOT bring fair use back as it was.
You CANNOT make backups.
You CANNOT transcode a DRM'd file to your choice of format.
This bill is a PR scam to make you think they are listening to the citizens, when they are really only covering their corporate interests asses.
Fair Use for THEM, not YOU. Don't be fooled. - Roksix, on 10/12/2007, -13/+105WOOOOOOO!!!
- vypergts, on 10/12/2007, -2/+78Don't worry, it's sans teeth (i.e. sounds good but actually does very little): http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070228-8942.html
You knew it was too good to be true... - mklopez, on 10/12/2007, -0/+39Direct link:
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/posttech/2007/02/digital_fair_use_bill_introduc.html - AntBing, on 10/12/2007, -3/+34This is definitely one of the more informative/useful stories I've seen on Digg. At least the ball is rolling in the right direction, now all it needs to do is build up some steam and squash the RIAA and MPAA.
- iceeblue, on 10/12/2007, -3/+23I will follow this with great interest. I am thrilled today to even have some of our elected officials understand the problem. I make a okay income and can afford to buy movies and music but because of drm I have completely stopped. I want to be able to buy a movie and play it of my laptop hard drive on a plane, in every TV in my house, in my friends house, and my ipod. I do not want to buy the same movie 5-6 times like Sony would like. Call me old fashioned I grew up taping LP's to tape to play in my car and I was never accused of being a thief or pirate. In fact the use of home brew tapes probably more than any other influence led to my continued purchase of music. In later years it has proven to expand my ear and inspired me to be more experimental.
It is way less hassle and after all time is money to run down to a store and buy a movie or cd rather than trying to find a torrent and maintain a ratio. I want to buy movies remove the drm so I can. - joshua5, on 10/12/2007, -3/+18yeah itd be great if digg had a user feature to amend the links by vote. cut out all this crappy blog spam
- anasazi, on 10/12/2007, -2/+17"they're totally with us"
no actually, they're not. wait for the other shoe to drop. - prisoner24601, on 10/12/2007, -5/+18Defending our Fair Use rights is up to us and we have to make our voices heard.
Spend 2 minutes and call your representatives:
202-224-3121 (Congressional Switchboard, call three times, each time give them your ZIP code and then ask for the Representative for your district, then the senior, and then junior senator for your state) - fishinabarrel, on 10/12/2007, -2/+13 The RIAA accused you of being a pirate the moment blank cassette tapes came out in the 80s. It just wasn't as publicized as now. They screamed that blank tapes should be illegal or that we least should pay a royalty for them.... I watched a pasty faced record Exec whine about it on 60 minutes back in like 1984.
- Langford, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11If anyone has a link to the actually bill, it would be swell to get a look at it.
If they aren't taking this seriously, then maybe we need to get loud and tell our representatives that we will settle for no less than the repeal of the DMCA. - Yez70, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10If you read the bill - you will probably think the RIAA wrote it. They're just using the term 'fair use' to mean fair for them - not us.
It has no teeth and changes hardly anything. It's a tiny step nowhere by a typically corporate congress. - insomuchas, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9First read the text of the bill, then decide if you like it or not. Then realise it'll change drastically before it gets voted on and probably get a bunch of pork addons tied to it to boot.
- Langford, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9This could be very very good, but still I would like more information before I pass judgment. It's not that I don't trust politicians, but I don't trust politicians. My cynical senses are tingling, and they tell me that if the bill is any good, it will never pass.
- ArchonSG, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8Actually the original "fair use" act was put in because the media content providers were up in arms that we could make copies of say ...the Super Bowl and later share it with friends or family. That includes movies or any other content on the air including radio such as AM / FM music.
The content providers were concerned even back then that we were "pirating" content that we didn't pay for.
"Fair use" before the DMCA passed on Oct 8 1998 essentially meant that if it was aired, it was fair use for consumers to make copies for person use only. Eg; backups, or to view on a later date.
AFTER the DMCA, things changed. Basically and this might be one of the valid reasons why the DMCA got such traction was that making digital copies of available digital content was essentially a master copy in itself, which unlike the VHS / Betamax /FM and AM copying had quality degradation issues, which the content providers hammered in as well as paying bribes (lets call the "donations / contributions" as it is) to get the act passed.
The above act isn't "fair use" nor does it have anything to do with "fair use", it is using that acronym to fool you, the consumers into thinking that something is being done for fair use while its really just padding to hide the fact that the content providers are already gouging you for all that they can get from you. Blood money and all.
I know I'll probably be dugged down by the shills, and people who don't really understand what the above act is, or by people who just want to believe what they want to, the truth is, as consumers we are pretty much a sad bunch.
Most don't know what is going on with DRM or what the RIAA / MPAA are up to and most don't care. - MrSketch, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9This was discussed on Slashdot yesterday ( http://politics.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/02/27/1946228 ), and it appears that we shouldn't get our hopes up. The bill does not appear to deliver on what most observers want: clear protection for making personal use copies of encrypted materials. There is no allowance for consumers to make backups of DVDs, to strip encryption from music purchased online so that it can be played anywhere, or to generally do any of the things that the DMCA has made illegal.
But at least it's a step in the right direction. - bobpaul, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8this bill doesn't do *****. Tell them you want to backup your dvds, transcode music to other formats to play on your mp3 player, etc. Tell them this bill needs to be extended. And don't "keep calling" or they'll stop taking your calls, dumbass.
- digiroam, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Does anyone else see an ulterior motive looming?
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Maybe you should read the bill. It does nothing to make DRM illegal. It mostly deal with the Grokster case by limiting when statutory damages that can be awared in case of secondary infringement. It also codifies the Copyright offices exceptions for circumvention of DRM (ie by professors for class room use). The distribution of circumvention tools would still be illegal under this act.
See http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070228-8942.html - thcobbs, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Am I the only one who gets tired of Congress slamming together words to form a pre-determined acronym?
Just title the bill something meaningful, damn it, and let us sort out how to abbreviate it! - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -5/+10Realize that FAIR USE is not what YOU think it is or want it to be.
- geekee, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Digg's idea of fair use is horrible. They think sharing movies with your million best friends is fair use, and cry when they get sued.
- theblueprint, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Let your Representative know how you feel:
http://www.house.gov/writerep/
You need your zip code with the 4 digit extension. If you don't know it, you can find it here:
http://zip4.usps.com/zip4/welcome.jsp - bobpaul, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Agreed. This article is lame. The blogger knows nothing about the actual bill. Slashdot had much better coverage on this yesterday, but vypergts already posted the ars link which was is the most important part.
- halik, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5Or you can tag it as blog SPAM? I'm sure there 20 identical submissions in the pipeline, just digg the right one
- Yez70, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Do you work for the RIAA?
It seems like THEY wrote the bill for them, not for your 'fair use' rights.
Supporting this bill as it stands will not change anything. It has no teeth and it DOES NOT give us 'fair use' - to do what we wish with what we purchase.
If you are going to call, make sure you state you want 'fair use' back as it should be - to do what you want with what you buy. This bill is currently a joke. - I_Soar, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5Amen. Per my post above, it's continually astonishing what certain people perceive "fair use" to be. As you point out, it's not what they think it is.
The ignorance that clouds these debates is depressing, frankly.
(Go ahead, high schoolers -- Digg down our posts!) - merreborn, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2It's also worth noting that the rep that submitted this submitted it in '02 and '03 as well, and possibly several times since.
While it doesn't do much, it is a step in the right direction. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -6/+8Awwww, how cute. A delusional idiot.
- odinfire, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3You know, I can completely understand people seeking out the government to regulate DRM a little bit better, but for the sake of God and all creation...
What the hell is wrong with you people. Why on God's green earth would any of you want to listen to, or even worse, download RIAA backed music. The RIAA is suing middle and low income families for thousands of dollars. They are basically suing poor people for profit. It's sickening, pathetic, and downright immoral. I WILL NEVER...EVER... purchase music by a label that supports the RIAA or any form of DRM... and neither should you. Yup, that may mean that I have to make some sacrifices (but not really considering the sad state of music right now), but I am sure I can do without.
I haven't purchased a CD or music in 5-6 years. I dont see the need to change now. The MPAA is no better. If your really smart, you won't be buying a PS3 or blu-ray player either. Sony's out of control when it comes to DRM on blu-ray. If ya gotta buy, inform yourself on HD-DVD, it may not be able to hold as much information, but you will be glad to know the DRM is easier to get through.
Be smart, dont buy any more cd's from major record labels. I'm not trying to support piracy, just don't give these immoral bastards any more money. All they will do is continue to take your rights away with whatever cash they can get their hands on. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Don't count on this passing. Once the RIAA slush fund money starts flowing into the pocket of their favorite scumbags, I mean congressman, the bill will simply die in commitee.
- straxus, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3What? You get points for making me smile, but who or what did you think you were responding to? That was the second most random, non-nonsensical reply I have ever read on Digg. Well done.
- counterplex, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Is it just me or is Congress in the habit of naming bills so they're acronym-friendly? To top it off, the acronym is usually misleading.
e.g. USA PATRIOT act, FAIR USE bill, etc - JonGalt, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Ang...your prolly right. Its a habit i need to break. I get carried away easily and start categorizing ppl. Although on a positive note I think this was the first civil discussion I've had with anyone since I've come to this website. lol. see ya round.
On a sidenote id like to know why ppl are digging you down? Im pretty sure our discussion was very on topic? - monkeyrun, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Seem like a step in the right direction for digital media.
Let's see if this will really affect DRM. - edrift101, on 10/12/2007, -9/+10We all need to get behind this! Contact your representatives and let them know that they need to support this bill. Call today and keep calling!
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Finally! Someone gets it! If this law passes, it'll be sure to prevent competition from allowing some upstart recording company to come along to change the industry and cause economic pain to our fine, old recording institutions, since those in the RIAA want to keep things the same! It'll also allow the RIAA to hijack legislation and make give them some protections. This is very good for all old companies in the recording industry. Isn't that who this is for?
- felchdonkey, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3How sad that it's considered news when there's finally an occasion that Congress is "totally with us."
They're supposed to be OUR representatives, and yet 90% of the bills they pass seem aimed at taking away individual rights and freedoms, finding new ways to tax us, or giving corporations more rights than people.
It's like that old Chris Rock sketch about the guy who brags that he's not in jail and takes care of his kids.
Congress: "We're on the people's side this time!"
America: "What do you want, a cookie?! You're SUPPOSED to be on our side you low expectation-having *****!" - mizzerd, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Someone already posted this, but this bill isn't going to affect most of us (WAAAY up top). It's biggest impact is probably going to be on libraries. Of course, you would be able to circumvent DRM if you have old software that uses a dongle, but the dongle is no longer supported.
It's not a silver bullet to anything. It certainly won't make it legal to make copies of your music, rip CDs, or the millions of other things that are currently "technically" illegal.
Calm down, now. - aviancarpaint, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4The RIAA lobby is bound to launch an offensive... but hey, glad to see that the report by the IIPA, or should i say, "US"-IPA, is being ignored.
- N0CTURN3, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Call your Senator!
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm - thedpshow, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1All this means is that somebody knows how people feel. It would take years for significant changes to occur.
- felchdonkey, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1If this is the first time you've ever heard of Gizmodo, then all I have to say is, "Welcome to the internet. Been here long?"
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I performed anal on the RIAA.
- whitesnow158, on 10/24/2007, -0/+0Yesterday, Albumbase.com surpassed over 100000 live music albums available to its users which makes it the world’s largest music album database.
http://mp3away.com/letters-mp3-o/
http://mp3away.com/letters-mp3-p/
http://mp3away.com/letters-mp3-q/
http://mp3away.com/letters-mp3-r/
http://mp3away.com/letters-mp3-s/
http://mp3away.com/letters-mp3-t/
http://mp3away.com/letters-mp3-u/
http://mp3away.com/letters-mp3-v/
http://mp3away.com/letters-mp3-w/
http://mp3away.com/letters-mp3-x/
http://mp3away.com/letters-mp3-y/
http://mp3away.com/letters-mp3-z/
http://mp3away.com/letters-mp3-dig/ - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1I promise I'll learn to proof read my posts one day lol :)
- PaulLev, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1It's a good step in the right direction ... as author, I have no problem with people reading my work and not paying...http://www.paullevinson.net/archives/fair_use_bill_in_congress.phtml
- morouxshi, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Wake me when this passes. Oh, and by 'passes' I do not mean, 'they added a clause that builds a bridge to nowhere', or 'as long as you register at the riaas website' or 'as long as you buy 3 copies of a britney spears song'. I mean unadulterated, passing.
good luck gentlemen. - straxus, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2@JonGalt
Then I take it you are also for repealing the DMCA? After all, "Laws = arbitrary force". Right? While we're at it, let's do away with copyright laws altogether. Because as you say, "...when you put force in the market place your totally avoiding the only legitimate way to make change, by using your money and your discretion on companies and their products that you deem worthy." I mean, you're consistent right? -
Show 51 - 86 of 86 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is